Simulation and quantitative evaluation of three surgical techniques of endoscopic enucleation of prostate on a realistic phantom model.

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Senol Tonyali, Maximilian Ferry Von Bargen, Maximilian Glienke, Mazhar Ortac, August Sigle
{"title":"Simulation and quantitative evaluation of three surgical techniques of endoscopic enucleation of prostate on a realistic phantom model.","authors":"Senol Tonyali, Maximilian Ferry Von Bargen, Maximilian Glienke, Mazhar Ortac, August Sigle","doi":"10.1007/s00345-024-05404-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the impact of three different AEEP techniques on the training performance of novices using a realistic hydrogel prostate phantom model.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The experimental setup utilized realistic prostate phantom model provided by the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Germany. For the enucleation, we utilized a new solid-state pulsed thulium laser (Thulio®, Dornier MedTech, Weßling, Germany). We explored three different AEEP techniques-bilobar, trilobar, and en-bloc-repeated ten times each, totaling 30 procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median enucleation time was 9.5 min (range: 6-16), median laser time was 4.29 min (3.21-6.34), median total energy used was 25.8 kJ (19.4-38.1), and median number of laser pulses was 12.8 thousand (9.7-17). There were no significant differences in operation time, laser time, pulses, or joules among the en-bloc, two-lobe, and three-lobe techniques (p = 0.113, 0.143, 0.148, 0.141 respectively). Ultrasound evaluations showed the one-lobe technique to be superior in accuracy, smoothness, and circularity (p = 0.0002, 0.012, 0.00005 respectively) (Figs. 9, 10, 11), despite having the highest perforation rate, which was not statistically significant compared to other techniques (p = 1.4). The one-lobe technique's higher accuracy may increase the risk of perforation. In contrast, the three-lobe technique had the lowest perforation rate and removal efficiency due to its lower accuracy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The en-bloc, bilobar, and trilobar enucleation techniques exhibited comparable operation times. The one-lobe method emerged as superior in terms of accuracy, smoothness, and circularity. However, it also presented the highest rate of perforation.</p>","PeriodicalId":23954,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Urology","volume":"43 1","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-05404-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the impact of three different AEEP techniques on the training performance of novices using a realistic hydrogel prostate phantom model.

Material and methods: The experimental setup utilized realistic prostate phantom model provided by the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Germany. For the enucleation, we utilized a new solid-state pulsed thulium laser (Thulio®, Dornier MedTech, Weßling, Germany). We explored three different AEEP techniques-bilobar, trilobar, and en-bloc-repeated ten times each, totaling 30 procedures.

Results: Median enucleation time was 9.5 min (range: 6-16), median laser time was 4.29 min (3.21-6.34), median total energy used was 25.8 kJ (19.4-38.1), and median number of laser pulses was 12.8 thousand (9.7-17). There were no significant differences in operation time, laser time, pulses, or joules among the en-bloc, two-lobe, and three-lobe techniques (p = 0.113, 0.143, 0.148, 0.141 respectively). Ultrasound evaluations showed the one-lobe technique to be superior in accuracy, smoothness, and circularity (p = 0.0002, 0.012, 0.00005 respectively) (Figs. 9, 10, 11), despite having the highest perforation rate, which was not statistically significant compared to other techniques (p = 1.4). The one-lobe technique's higher accuracy may increase the risk of perforation. In contrast, the three-lobe technique had the lowest perforation rate and removal efficiency due to its lower accuracy.

Conclusion: The en-bloc, bilobar, and trilobar enucleation techniques exhibited comparable operation times. The one-lobe method emerged as superior in terms of accuracy, smoothness, and circularity. However, it also presented the highest rate of perforation.

三种内镜下前列腺内核摘除术技术在真实假体模型上的模拟与定量评价。
目的:利用真实的水凝胶前列腺幻像模型,评价三种不同的AEEP技术对新手训练成绩的影响。材料与方法:实验装置采用德国马克斯普朗克智能系统研究所提供的逼真前列腺幻影模型。对于去核,我们使用了一种新的固态脉冲铥激光器(Thulio®,Dornier MedTech, Weßling,德国)。我们探索了三种不同的AEEP技术——双叶式、三叶式和en-bloc,每种重复10次,总共30次。结果:中位去核时间为9.5 min(范围:6 ~ 16),中位激光时间为4.29 min(3.21 ~ 6.34),中位总能量为25.8 kJ(19.4 ~ 38.1),中位激光脉冲数为12.8千个(9.7 ~ 17)。双瓣、双瓣和三瓣手术时间、激光时间、脉冲或焦耳均无显著差异(p分别为0.113、0.143、0.148、0.141)。超声评估显示,单瓣技术在准确性、平滑度和圆度方面都有优势(p分别为0.0002、0.012、0.00005)(图9、10、11),尽管穿孔率最高,但与其他技术相比差异无统计学意义(p = 1.4)。单瓣技术的精度较高,但可能会增加穿孔的风险。相比之下,由于精度较低,三瓣技术的射孔率和去除效率最低。结论:整体、双叶和三叶去核技术的手术时间相当。单瓣法在精度、平滑度和圆度方面表现出优越性。然而,它也呈现出最高的射孔率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Urology
World Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
317
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY conveys regularly the essential results of urological research and their practical and clinical relevance to a broad audience of urologists in research and clinical practice. In order to guarantee a balanced program, articles are published to reflect the developments in all fields of urology on an internationally advanced level. Each issue treats a main topic in review articles of invited international experts. Free papers are unrelated articles to the main topic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信