Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40659860›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025

Exoscopic-assisted head and neck surgery: a comparative evaluation optimizing ergonomics and workflow.

J P Lingl, T K Hoffmann, E Goldberg-Bockhorn, J Greve, F Boehm

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Prospective evaluation of the VITOM 3D exoscope in ear surgery compared with surgical microscopes: part II-optical performance, handling, workload and ergonomics.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
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

5 authors.

J P LinglDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ulm University Medical Center, Frauensteige 12, 89075, Ulm, Germany. julia.lingl@uniklinik-ulm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7311-0775
T K HoffmannDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ulm University Medical Center, Frauensteige 12, 89075, Ulm, Germany.
E Goldberg-BockhornDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ulm University Medical Center, Frauensteige 12, 89075, Ulm, Germany.
J GreveDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ulm University Medical Center, Frauensteige 12, 89075, Ulm, Germany.
F BoehmDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ulm University Medical Center, Frauensteige 12, 89075, Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exoscopic surgery is an emerging visualization technique in head and neck surgery, offering a promising alternative to conventional surgical microscopes. AI-assisted functions and high-quality imaging support its integration into modern surgical workflows. Eleven head and neck procedures were evaluated, including otologic surgery, parotidectomy and microvascular anastomosis using exoscopic techniques. Subjective feedback was obtained from four primary surgeons and four surgical assistants (response rate 100%) via a custom, non-validated questionnaire comprising 18 items. Six questions compared exoscope versus standard magnification (microscope or surgical loupes) across domains including anatomical structure identification, depth perception, field illumination and magnification, preoperative setup handling, and overall preference. Twelve questions addressed ergonomic comfort, 3D glasses and head-mounted display (HMDmd) wearability, and intraoperative handling. Ergonomic strain was assessed using the validated Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Exoscopic systems demonstrated advantages, such as superior 4K-3D imaging, enhanced depth perception, improved ergonomics and facilitated intraoperative collaboration and education. RULA scores indicated reduced musculoskeletal strain, especially during longer procedures. Mean setup time was 4:14 min (range: 4:05-4:45 min), including draping (mean 2:04 min; range: 1:50-2:30 min). Surgeons described a brief adaptation period, primarily related to foot pedal control and digital interface navigation. AI-assisted features, including Auto-Center and Voice Control, further optimized workflow. Exoscopic surgery offers benefits for head and neck procedures requiring sustained magnification and precision. Short training times and ongoing technological advancements, such as improved working distances, head-mounted displays, and cost efficiency, are expected to further enhance its clinical value.

Indexed as

ErgonomicsHeadNeckRobotic Surgical ProceduresWorkflowHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalSurgeonsSurveys and QuestionnairesCochlear implantationErgonomicsExoscopeExoscopic surgeryHead and neck surgeryMicro-surgeryMicrovascular anastomosesMicrovascular flapOtolaryngologyParotidectomyRobot-assisted microscopyRoboticsSurgical educationSurgical workflow optimizationTympanoplasty

Identifiers

PMID40659860
PMCPMC12259794

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.