Endoscopic training-is the future three-dimensional?

Does High-Definition 3-Dimensional Imaging Improve Orientation During Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery? A Prospective Trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy has evolved as the standard visualization tool for endonasal transsphenoidal resection of sellar lesions. The most widely used 2-dimensional (2D) endoscopes harbor the problem of limited depth perception. Therefore, 3-dimensional (3D) endoscopes have been developed to enable depth perception through a stereoscopic view.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of high-definition (HD) 2D vs 3D HD endoscopes on spatial orientation within the sphenoid sinus.

METHODS

In this prospective single-center study, 21 patients have been investigated (2021-2022). Eleven standardized anatomic landmarks, which were preoperatively defined on neuronavigation imaging, were intraoperatively targeted with a navigation probe using either 2D HD or 3D HD endoscopes for visualization.

RESULTS

Overall, 3D HD endoscopes provided a statistically significant higher accuracy of identification of sphenoid sinus landmarks (median deviation: 5.2 mm vs 4.2 mm, P < .001). In detail: tuberculum sellae (3.0 mm vs 4.3 mm, P = .047), most anterior point of sella (3.3 mm vs 4.8 mm, P = .049), and clivus indentation (3.8 mm vs 5.3 mm, P = .035). Anatomic variations such as a complex sphenoid sinus configuration had no influence on identifying sphenoid sinus landmarks.

CONCLUSION

According to our data, stereoscopic 3D HD endoscopy enhances intraoperative orientation by improved depth perception within the sphenoid sinus. This may add to the safety of endoscopic skull base procedures, especially in extended approaches and cases with distorted anatomy.

Three-Dimensional Endoscopic Endonasal Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To compare participant performance and preference in the use of three-dimensional (3D) endoscopy compared to traditional two-dimensional (2D) endoscopy.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Medline, ClinicalKey, BMJ Case Reports, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched for English-language articles published between 2005 and 2020. Studies reporting comparisons of outcomes between 3D and 2D endoscopes were identified. Data relating to performance-related outcomes, as well as the participants' preferred endoscope were extracted, and pooled using meta-analysis models.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Six studies reported results of participants completing simulated tasks with endoscopes, while four reported full procedures. Peg transfer tasks (n = 4 cohorts) were found to be completed significantly faster with the 3D versus 2D endoscope (pooled mean difference 6.8 seconds, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3-11.3), while no significant difference in times taken was observed for touch tasks (n = 4; pooled mean difference 3.7 seconds, 95% CI: -1.9 to 9.2). The secondary outcome of participant preference was reported by five studies, in which a significant preference for the 3D endoscope was observed (P = .010), with a pooled total of 72% (95% CI: 59-83) of participants preferring this to the 2D endoscope.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing body of evidence in support of 3D visualization in endoscopy. We have demonstrated 3D endoscopy to be associated with a significantly shorter time to performing simulated, reproducible and controlled tasks, and to be the preference of participants. This study provides grounds for further evaluation of the technology, and the potential for a greater widespread use. Laryngoscope, 2021.

2D versus 3D Endoscopy: Head-to-Head Comparison in a Simulated Model of Endoscopic Endonasal Dural Suturing

Objective Endonasal dural suturing (EDS) has been reported to decrease the incidence of cerebrospinal fluid fistula. This technique requires handling of single-shaft instrumentation in the narrow endonasal corridor. It has been proposed that three-dimensional (3D) endoscopes were associated with improved depth perception. In this study, we sought to perform a comparison of two-dimensional (2D) versus 3D endoscopy by assessing surgical proficiency in a simulated model of EDS.

Materials and Methods Twenty-six participants subdivided into groups based on previous endoscopic experience were asked to pass barbed sutures through preset targets with either 2D (Storz Hopkins II) or 3D (Storz TIPCAM) endoscopes on 3D-printed simulation model. Surgical precision and procedural time were measured. All participants completed a Likert scale questionnaire.

Results Novice, intermediate, and expert groups took 11.0, 8.7, and 5.7 minutes with 2D endoscopy and 10.9, 9.0, and 7.6 minutes with 3D endoscopy, respectively. The average deviation for novice, intermediate, and expert groups (mm) was 5.5, 4.4, and 4.3 with 2D and 6.6, 4.6, and 3.0 with 3D, respectively. No significant difference in procedural time or accuracy was found in 2D versus 3D endoscopy. 2D endoscopic visualization was preferred by the majority of expert/intermediate participants, while 3D endoscopic visualization by the novice group.

Conclusion In this pilot study, there was no statistical difference in procedural time or accuracy when utilizing 2D versus 3D endoscopes. While it is possible that widespread familiarity with 2D endoscopic equipment has biased this study, preliminary analysis suggests that 3D endoscopy offers no definitive advantage over 2D endoscopy in this simulated model of EDS.

Creative and Innovative Methods and Techniques for the Challenges in the Management of Adult Craniopharyngioma

Craniopharyngioma remains a major challenge in daily clinical practice. The pathobiology of the tumor is still elusive, and there are no consensus or treatment guidelines on the optimal management strategy for this relatively rare tumor. However, recent technical and scientific advances, including genomic and radiomic profiling, innovation in surgical approaches, more precise radiotherapy protocols, targeted therapy, and restoration of lost functions all have the potential to significantly improve the outcome of patients with craniopharyngioma in the near future. Although many of these innovative tools in the new armamentarium of the clinician are still in their infancy, they could reduce craniopharyngioma-related morbidity and mortality and improve the patients' quality of life. In this article, we discuss these creative and innovative approaches that may offer solutions to the obstacles faced in treating craniopharyngioma and future possibilities in improving the care of these patients.