Vaz-Guimaraes Francisco, Rastelli Milton M, Fernandez-Miranda Juan C, Wang Eric W, Gardner Paul A, Snyderman Carl H
Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States.
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States.
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2015 Sep;76(5):365-71. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1544124. Epub 2015 May 13.
Objective The lack of a standard technique may be a relevant issue in teaching endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) to novice surgeons. The objective of this article is to compare different endoscope positioning and microsurgical dissection techniques in EES training. Methods A comparative trial was designed to evaluate three techniques: group A, one surgeon performing binarial two-hands dissection using an endoscope holder (rigid endoscopy); group B, two surgeons performing a combined binarial two- and three-handed dissection with one surgeon guiding the endoscope (dynamic endoscopy); and group C, two surgeons performing a binarial two-hands dissection with one surgeon dedicated to endoscope positioning and the other dedicated to a two-handed dissection. Trainees were randomly assigned to these groups and oriented to complete surgical tasks in a validated training model for EES. A global rating scale, and a specific-task checklist for EES were used to assess surgical skills. Results The mean scores of the global rating scale and the specific-task checklist were higher (p = 0.001 and 0.002, respectively) for group C, reflecting the positive impact of dynamic endoscopy and bimanual dissection on training performance. Conclusions We found that dynamic endoscopic and bimanual-binarial microdissection techniques had a significant positive impact on EES training.
对于向新手外科医生传授鼻内镜鼻窦手术(EES)而言,缺乏标准技术可能是一个相关问题。本文的目的是比较EES培训中不同的内镜定位和显微手术解剖技术。方法:设计了一项比较试验来评估三种技术:A组,一名外科医生使用内镜固定器进行双手双目解剖(硬质内镜);B组,两名外科医生进行双手双目和三手联合解剖,一名外科医生指导内镜(动态内镜);C组,两名外科医生进行双手双目解剖,一名外科医生专门负责内镜定位,另一名专门负责双手解剖。将学员随机分配到这些组中,并指导他们在经过验证的EES培训模型中完成手术任务。使用全球评分量表和EES的特定任务清单来评估手术技能。结果:C组的全球评分量表和特定任务清单的平均得分更高(分别为p = 0.001和0.002),这反映了动态内镜和双手解剖对培训表现的积极影响。结论:我们发现动态内镜和双手双目显微解剖技术对EES培训有显著的积极影响。