Display options
Cite
Paraskevopoulos D, Roth J, Constantini S. Endoscope Holders in Cranial Neurosurgery: Part I-Technology, Trends, and Implications. World Neurosurg. 2016;89:343-54doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.01.052.
Paraskevopoulos, D., Roth, J., & Constantini, S. (2016). Endoscope Holders in Cranial Neurosurgery: Part I-Technology, Trends, and Implications. World neurosurgery, 89343-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.01.052
Paraskevopoulos, Dimitrios, et al. "Endoscope Holders in Cranial Neurosurgery: Part I-Technology, Trends, and Implications." World neurosurgery vol. 89 (2016): 343-54. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.01.052
Paraskevopoulos D, Roth J, Constantini S. Endoscope Holders in Cranial Neurosurgery: Part I-Technology, Trends, and Implications. World Neurosurg. 2016 May;89:343-54. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.01.052. Epub 2016 Feb 01. PMID: 26844875.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

World Neurosurg. 2016 May;89:343-54. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.01.052. Epub 2016 Feb 01.

Endoscope Holders in Cranial Neurosurgery: Part I-Technology, Trends, and Implications.

World neurosurgery

Dimitrios Paraskevopoulos, Jonathan Roth, Shlomi Constantini

Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Barts Health NHS Trust, St. Bartholomew's and The Royal London Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: [email protected].
  2. Department of Pediatric Neurosurgery, Dana Children's Hospital, Tel Aviv Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

PMID: 26844875 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.01.052

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cranial neuroendoscopy is becoming increasingly popular. Endoscopes may be used free-hand or with endoscope holders (EH). The aim of this paper is to summarize the evolution of EH and attempt an overview of currently available devices, features, and usage, identifying weaknesses and focusing on feasibility.

METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on Pubmed, OvidSP, Ebsco, and Google Scholar. Targeted search through cross-references was also implemented, followed by personal contacts, interviews, company websites, and operating manuals. A pilot survey was performed to acquire an impression of the current state of usage. This was conducted by approaching surgeons from several countries via e-mail and online through a neurosurgical exchange forum. A more extensive survey will follow as Part II.

RESULTS: EH may be divided into manual and pneumatic. The use of micromanipulators is sometimes implemented. Different characteristics have been described, such as pneumatic, mechanical, friction, micromanipulator, robotic, hybrid, air-locking, and voice-control. Twenty eight surgeons responded. The majority (75%) do not routinely use EH. The rest use EH mainly for intraventricular rather than skull base procedures. Nearly all surgeons (96%) stated using a second surgeon regularly. Reported weaknesses included crude movements, downward drift, loss of depth perception, lack of flexibility, iatrogenic injury, cost, and bulky construction.

CONCLUSIONS: Although EH have a role in neuroendoscopy, their use seems to be limited and their features regarded as suboptimal. There are no clear indications regarding the procedures that should be performed using EH. Many factors affect the implication of EH, including safety, type of surgery, surgeon's preference, and mechanical properties.

Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Endoscope; Holding device; Minimally invasive surgery; Neuroendoscopy; Skull base; Ventricular surgery

MeSH terms

Publication Types