ArticleThe Laryngoscope2019
Real-time robotic airway measurement: An additional benefit of a novel steady-hand robotic platform.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microsurgery Robots: Applications, Design, and Development.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDescribe the secondary capability of a robotic system to provide real-time measurements of airway dimensions with high fidelity.
methodsSeven unique phantoms of laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) were modeled using a computer-aided design tool and were three dimensionally printed. These stenoses were of different dimensions and orientations, and some were purposefully oblique. The dimensions of the stenoses were then measured with the novel Robotic ENT (Ear, Nose, and Throat) Microsurgery System (REMS; Galen Robotics, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) because it is capable of tool position memory in three dimensional (3D) space. Five participants (two laryngologists, two otolaryngology-head and neck surgery residents, one neurotology fellow) measured each axis of stenosis (anteroposterior, lateral, and craniocaudal) three times for each of the seven stenosis phantoms. These measurements were then compared to the known design dimensions. Mean magnitude of error (MOE) and interrater reliability (IRR) using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were then calculated.
resultsMean MOE and standard deviation for all measurements was 0.306 ± 0.247 mm. Mean MOE was 0.374 ± 0.292 mm, 0.300 ± 0.237 mm, and 0.244 ± 0.185 mm for the anteroposterior, lateral, and craniocaudal dimensions of stenosis, respectively. Eighty-two percent of all measurements had MOE < 0.5 mm. ICC was 0.945 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.847-0.989), 0.995 (95% CI: 0.984-0.999), and 0.993 (95% CI: 0.987-0.999) for anteroposterior, lateral, and craniocaudal dimensions, respectively, indicating excellent agreement among participants.
conclusionThe REMS can be used to reliably and accurately measure airway dimensions in 3D regardless of the orientation of stenosis. This ability may be easily extrapolated to the measurement of any airway lesion during laryngotracheal surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 129:324-329, 2019.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.