Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39315469›Full record

Trial reportThe Laryngoscope2025

Augmented Reality-Guided Mastoidectomy Simulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing Surgical Proficiency.

Dor Hadida Barzilai, Shai Tejman-Yarden, David Yogev, Oliana Vazhgovsky, Netanel Nagar, Lior Sasson, Racheli Sion-Sarid, Yisrael Parmet, Abraham Goldfarb, Ophir Ilan

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A hybrid 3D-printed temporal bone simulator with simulated bleeding for otologic training.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Dor Hadida BarzilaiThe Engineering Medical Research Lab, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-9023-2862
Shai Tejman-YardenThe Engineering Medical Research Lab, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-8095-4303
David YogevThe Engineering Medical Research Lab, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-7321-5887
Oliana VazhgovskyThe Engineering Medical Research Lab, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Netanel NagarThe Engineering Medical Research Lab, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Lior SassonCardiothoracic Surgery, Wolfson Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Holon, Israel.
Racheli Sion-SaridPediatric Intensive Care Unit, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Yisrael ParmetDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2071-7338
Abraham GoldfarbDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Edith Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Ophir IlanDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Edith Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMastoidectomy surgical training is challenging due to the complex nature of the anatomical structures involved. Traditional training methods based on direct patient care and cadaveric temporal bone training have practical shortcomings. 3D-printed temporal bone models and augmented reality (AR) have emerged as promising solutions, particularly for mastoidectomy surgery, which demands an understanding of intricate anatomical structures. Evidence is needed to explore the potential of AR technology in addressing these training challenges.

methods21 medical students in their clinical clerkship were recruited for this prospective, randomized controlled trial assessing mastoidectomy skills. The participants were randomly assigned to the AR group, which received real-time guidance during drilling on 3D-printed temporal bone models, or to the control group, which received traditional training methods. Skills were assessed on a modified Welling scale and evaluated independently by two senior otologists.

resultsThe AR group outperformed the control group, with a mean overall drilling score of 19.5 out of 25, compared with the control group's score of 12 (p < 0.01). The AR group was significantly better at defining mastoidectomy margins (p < 0.01), exposing the antrum, preserving the lateral semicircular canal (p < 0.05), sharpening the sinodural angle (p < 0.01), exposing the tegmen and attic, preserving the ossicles (p < 0.01), and thinning and preserving the external auditory canal (p < 0.05).

conclusionAR simulation in mastoidectomy, even in a single session, improved the proficiency of novice surgeons compared with traditional methods. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 135:894-900, 2025.

Indexed as

Augmented RealityClinical CompetenceMastoidectomySimulation TrainingAdultFemaleHumansMaleMastoidModels, AnatomicPrinting, Three-DimensionalProspective StudiesStudents, MedicalTemporal BoneYoung Adult3D printingaugmented realitymastoidectomyotologyregistrationsurgical educationtemporal bone

Identifiers

PMID39315469
PMCPMC11725687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.