Cargando…
Validation of the novel Deep Reality Viewer (DRV) 3D digital stereo viewer in otology surgery
PURPOSE: Magnification with accurate optic reproduction of the surgical field is essential in otology surgery, but current technologies are subject to specific disadvantages. This study aims to evaluate a novel 3D digital stereo viewer, the Deep Reality Viewer (DRV), in otology surgery, in compariso...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8861478/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35192036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-022-07305-x |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: Magnification with accurate optic reproduction of the surgical field is essential in otology surgery, but current technologies are subject to specific disadvantages. This study aims to evaluate a novel 3D digital stereo viewer, the Deep Reality Viewer (DRV), in otology surgery, in comparison to both a 2D monitor and the gold standard of microscopy. METHODS: In this prospective clinical research study, ENT consultants and trainees evaluated visual and practical applications of the DRV. In visual assessment, participants (n = 11) viewed pre-recorded in vivo mastoid exploration displayed on a 2D monitor and the DRV screen. In practical assessment, participants (n = 9) performed otology surgical tasks on a cadaveric human head using both the microscope and DRV. Face, task-specific (TSV) and global content (GCV) outcomes were assessed using 5-point Likert scale questionnaires. Construct validity was assessed separately. RESULTS: The DRV achieved the pre-determined validation threshold of 4 for all validation parameters in both visual and practical assessment. The DRV significantly outperformed the 2D monitor in fourteen of 16 parameters. In comparison to microscopy, there was no significant difference in 13 of 16 parameters, with the DRV significantly outperforming in the remaining 3: defining anatomy (GCV), assessing middle ear anatomy (TSV) and overall TSV. Construct validity was not demonstrated for either technology. CONCLUSION: The DRV achieved the validation threshold for all parameters, and outperformed the 2D monitor and microscopy in several parameters. This validates the DRV for performing otological procedures, and suggests that it would be a useful alternative to the gold standard of microscopy in otology surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A. |
---|