Pan Jinxi, Tan Haoyue, Shi Jun, Wang Zhaoyan, Sterkers Olivier, Jia Huan, Wu Hao
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Front Surg. 2021 May 14;8:659688. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.659688. eCollection 2021.
The widespread application of endoscopic ear surgery (EES), performed through the external auditory canal, has revealed the limitations of the one-handed technique. The RobOtol® (Collin ORL, Bagneux, France) otological robotic system has been introduced to enable two-handed procedures; however, the thermal properties of dedicated endoscopes, which are usually used in neurosurgery, called "neuro-endoscopes," have not yet been clarified for the robotic systems. In this study, we aimed to profile the thermal characteristics of two dedicated neuro-endoscopes, as compared to endoscopes used routinely in manual EES, called "oto-endoscopes," and defined by a smaller diameter and shorter length, and to discuss the safe application of robotic assistance in EES. Two neuro-endoscopes (3.3 mm, 25 cm, 0°/30°) were studied using two routine light sources (LED/xenon), and two routine oto-endoscopes (3 mm, 14 cm, 0°/30°) were initially measured to provide a comprehensive comparison. Light intensities and temperatures were measured at different power settings. The thermal distributions were measured in an open environment and a human temporal bone model of EES. The cooling measures were also studied. Light intensity was correlated with stabilized tip temperatures ( < 0.01, = 0.8719). Under 100% xenon power, the stabilized temperatures at the tips of 0°, 30° neuro-endoscopes, and 0°, 30° oto-endoscopes were 96.1, 60.1, 67.8, and 56.4°C, respectively. With 100% LED power, the temperatures decreased by about 10°C, respectively. For the 0° neuro-endoscope, the illuminated area far away 1cm from the tip was below 37°C when using more than 50% both power, while this distance for 30° neuro-endoscope was 0.5 cm. In the EES temporal bone model, the round window area could reach 59.3°C with the 0° neuro-endoscope under 100% xenon power. Suction resulted in a ~1-2°C temperature drop, while a 10 mL saline rinse gave a baseline temperature which lasted for 2.5 min. Neuro-endoscope causes higher thermal releasing in the surgical cavity of ESS, which should be especially cautious in the robotic system usage. Applying submaximal light intensity, a LED source and intermittent rinsing should be considered for the safer robot-assisted EES using a neuro-endoscope that allows a two-handed surgical procedure.
通过外耳道进行的耳内镜手术(EES)的广泛应用揭示了单手技术的局限性。已引入RobOtol®(法国巴涅的科林耳鼻喉科公司)耳科机器人系统以实现双手操作;然而,通常用于神经外科手术的专用内镜(称为“神经内镜”)的热特性在机器人系统中尚未得到阐明。在本研究中,我们旨在剖析两种专用神经内镜的热特性,并与手动EES中常规使用的内镜(称为“耳内镜”,其直径较小且长度较短)进行比较,并讨论机器人辅助在EES中的安全应用。使用两种常规光源(LED/氙气)对两种神经内镜(3.3毫米,25厘米,0°/30°)进行了研究,并且最初测量了两种常规耳内镜(3毫米,14厘米,0°/30°)以提供全面比较。在不同功率设置下测量光强度和温度。在开放环境和EES的人类颞骨模型中测量热分布。还研究了冷却措施。光强度与稳定的尖端温度相关(<0.01,=0.8719)。在100%氙气功率下,0°、30°神经内镜以及0°、30°耳内镜尖端的稳定温度分别为96.1、60.1、67.8和56.4°C。在100%LED功率下,温度分别下降约10°C。对于0°神经内镜,当两种功率均超过50%时,距离尖端1厘米远处的照明区域低于37°C,而对于30°神经内镜,此距离为0.5厘米。在EES颞骨模型中,在100%氙气功率下,使用0°神经内镜时圆窗区域温度可达到59.3°C。抽吸导致温度下降约1-2°C,而10毫升生理盐水冲洗产生的基线温度持续2.5分钟。神经内镜在ESS手术腔中会导致更高的热释放,在使用机器人系统时应格外谨慎。对于使用神经内镜进行的更安全的机器人辅助EES(允许双手手术操作),应考虑应用次最大光强度、LED光源和间歇性冲洗。