Artikel
A new technique for stereotactically guided burr whole trepanantion simplifies the workflow of stereotactic surgery
Eine neue Technik für stereotaktisch geführte Bohrlochtrepanationen vereinfacht den Arbeitsablauf bei stereotaktischen Operationen
Suche in Medline nach
Autoren
Veröffentlicht: | 25. Mai 2022 |
---|
Gliederung
Text
Objective: Stereotactic procedures usually require burr whole trepanation. To date, there is virtually no CE-certified drilling system that can be integrated into a stereotactic apparatus and thus permits stereotactically guided trepanations. Thus, free-hand burr whole trepanation are still the standard of care and often require time-consuming osteoclastic expansions.
Methods: We developed a novel drill (HiCUTTM, Adeor) which can be picked up by a standard cordless screwdriver (Colibri IITM, DePuy Synthes) and a novel guide sleeve (Instrument guide ID:10mm RM rail holder, Inomed) which can be easily integrated into a stereotactic system (RM-System, Inomed). This setup allows the stereotactic guidance of the drill. An unpaired t-test and chi-square test was used to compare the stereotactically guided trepanation (SGT) with freehand trepanation (FHT) using a trepane (Meridian classicTM, Adeor) in terms of time for trepanation, time from trepanation to dura incision, and if additional surgical measurements (osteoclastic expansion, hemostasis) were necessary.
Results: Overall 84 trepanations (SGT: n=27, FHT=57) for stereotactic biopsies were observed. The mean time for completing the burr whole was 58 s ± 36 and showed no difference between both groups (p=0.485). The mean time until dura incision was significantly (p=0.018) reduced when using SGT (FTH: 304 s ±170 vs SGT: 136 s ± 89). Additional osteoclastic expansion was frequently necessary in the FHT group (81% (n=46) vs 3.7%, (n=1), p<0.001). Similar results were observed for hemostasis which was significantly less necessary in the SGT group (71% (n=41) vs 40%, (n=11), p=0.006). We did not observe any differences between specialists and trainees for all these parameters.
Conclusion: SGT significantly shortens the time until dura opening compared to FHT. Additionally, time-consuming hemostasis and osteoclastic expansions are no longer necessary when using SGT. Furthermore, SGT seems to be successfully applied regardless of the surgeon`s level of training.