Objective: Current literature debates the role of newly developed three-dimensional (3D) Exoscopes in the daily routine of neurosurgical practice. So far, only a small number of cadaver lab studies or case reports have examined the novel Aesculap Aeos Three-Dimensional Robotic Digital Microscope. This study aims to evaluate the grade of satisfaction and intraoperative handling of this novel system in neurosurgery. Methods: Nineteen neurosurgical procedures (12 cranial, 6 spinal and 1 peripheral nerve) performed over 9 weeks using the Aeos were analyzed. Ten neurosurgeons of varying levels of training were included after undergoing device instruction and training. Following every surgery, a questionnaire consisting of 43 items concerning intraoperative handling was completed. The questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: No intraoperative complications occurred. Surgical satisfaction was ranked high (78.95%). In total, 84.21% evaluated surgical ergonomics as satisfactory, while 78.95% of the surgeons would like to use this system frequently. Image quality, independent working zoom function and depth of field were perceived as suboptimal by several neurosurgeons. Conclusion: The use of Aeos is feasible and safe in microsurgical procedures, and surgical satisfaction was ranked high among most neurosurgeons in our study. The system might offer advanced ergonomic conditions in comparison to conventional ocular-based microscopes.
Following elective craniotomy, patients routinely receive 24-h monitoring in an intensive care unit (ICU). However, the benefit of intensive care monitoring and treatment in these patients is discussed controversially. This study aimed to evaluate the complication profile of a “No ICU – Unless” strategy and to compare this strategy with the standardized management of post-craniotomy patients in the ICU. Two postoperative management strategies were compared in a matched-pair analysis: The first cohort included patients who were managed in the normal ward postoperatively (“No ICU – Unless” group). The second cohort contained patients routinely admitted to the ICU (control group). Outcome parameters contained detailed complication profile, length of hospital and ICU stay, duration to first postoperative mobilization, number of unplanned imaging before scheduled postoperative imaging, number and type of intensive care interventions, as well as pre- and postoperative modified Rankin scale (mRS). Patient characteristics and clinical course were analyzed using electronic medical records. The No ICU – Unless (NIU) group consisted of 96 patients, and the control group consisted of 75 patients. Complication rates were comparable in both cohorts (16% in the NIU group vs. 17% in the control group; p = 0.123). Groups did not differ significantly in any of the outcome parameters examined. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the NIU group but did not reach statistical significance (average 5.8 vs. 6.8 days; p = 0.481). There was no significant change in the distribution of preoperative (p = 0.960) and postoperative (p = 0.425) mRS scores in the NIU and control groups. Routine postoperative ICU management does not reduce postoperative complications and does not affect the surgical outcome of patients after elective craniotomies. Most postoperative complications are detected after a 24-h observation period. This approach may represent a potential strategy to prevent the overutilization of ICU capacities while maintaining sufficient postoperative care for neurosurgical patients.
OBJECTIVE Following elective craniotomy patients routinely receive 24-hour monitoring in an intensive care unit. However, the benefit of intensive care monitoring and treatment in these patients is discussed controversially. This study aimed to evaluate the complication profile of a “No ICU – unless” strategy and to compare this strategy with the standardized management of post-craniotomy patients in the ICU. METHODS Two postoperative management strategies were compared in a matched-pair analysis: The first cohort included patients who were managed on the normal ward postoperatively (“No ICU – unless” group). The second cohort contained patients routinely admitted to the ICU (control group). Outcome parameters contained detailed complication profile, length of hospital and ICU stay, duration to first postoperative mobilization, number of unplanned CTs/MRIs before planned postoperative imaging, number and type of intensive care interventions as well as pre- and postoperative modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Patient characteristics and clinical course were analyzed using electronic medical records. RESULTS The NIU group consisted of 96 patients and the control group consisted of 75 patients. Complication rates were comparable in both cohorts (16% in the NIU group vs. 17% in the control group; p = 0.123). Groups did not differ significantly in any of the outcome parameters examined. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the NIU group but did not reach statistical significance (average 5.8 vs. 6.8 days; p = 0.481). There was no significant change in the distribution of preoperative (p = 0.960) and postoperative (p = 0.425) mRS scores in the NIU and control group. CONCLUSION Routine postoperative ICU management does not reduce postoperative complications and does not affect the surgical outcome of patients after elective craniotomies. Most postoperative complications are detected after a 24-hour observation period. This approach may represent a potential strategy to prevent overutilization of ICU capacities while maintaining sufficient postoperative care for neurosurgical patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.