Comparative Learning Curves of Microscope Versus Exoscope: A Preclinical Randomized Crossover Noninferiority Study

Hugo Layard Horsfall; Zeqian Mao; Chan Hee Koh; Danyal Z Khan; William Muirhead; Danail Stoyanov; Hani J Marcus

doi:10.3389/fsurg.2022.920252

Comparative Learning Curves of Microscope Versus Exoscope: A Preclinical Randomized Crossover Noninferiority Study

Front Surg. 2022 Jun 6:9:920252. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.920252. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Hugo Layard Horsfall^{1

2}, Zeqian Mao¹, Chan Hee Koh^{1

2}, Danyal Z Khan^{1

2}, William Muirhead^{1

2}, Danail Stoyanov², Hani J Marcus^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Victor Horsley Department of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom.
² Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Abstract

Background: An exoscope heralds a new era of optics in surgery. However, there is limited quantitative evidence describing and comparing the learning curve.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the learning curve, plateau, and rate of novice surgeons using an Olympus ORBEYE exoscope compared to an operating microscope (Carl Zeiss OPMI PENTERO or KINEVO 900).

Methods: A preclinical, randomized, crossover, noninferiority trial assessed the performance of seventeen novice and seven expert surgeons completing the microsurgical grape dissection task "Star's the limit." A standardized star was drawn on a grape using a stencil with a 5 mm edge length. Participants cut the star and peeled the star-shaped skin off the grape with microscissors and forceps while minimizing damage to the grape flesh. Participants repeated the task 20 times consecutively for each optical device. Learning was assessed using model functions such as the Weibull function, and the cognitive workload was assessed with the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX).

Results: Seventeen novice (male:female 12:5; median years of training 0.4 [0-2.8 years]) and six expert (male:female 4:2; median years of training 10 [8.9-24 years]) surgeons were recruited. "Star's the limit" was validated using a performance score that gave a threshold of expert performance of 70 (0-100). The learning rate (ORBEYE -0.94 ± 0.37; microscope -1.30 ± 0.46) and learning plateau (ORBEYE 64.89 ± 8.81; microscope 65.93 ± 9.44) of the ORBEYE were significantly noninferior compared to those of the microscope group (p = 0.009; p = 0.027, respectively). The cognitive workload on NASA-TLX was higher for the ORBEYE. Novices preferred the freedom of movement and ergonomics of the ORBEYE but preferred the visualization of the microscope.

Conclusions: This is the first study to quantify the ORBEYE learning curve and the first randomized controlled trial to compare the ORBEYE learning curve to that of the microscope. The plateau performance and learning rate of the ORBEYE are significantly noninferior to those of the microscope in a preclinical grape dissection task. This study also supports the ergonomics of the ORBEYE as reported in preliminary observational studies and highlights visualization as a focus for further development.

Keywords: education; exoscope; innovation; learning curve; microscope; neurosurgery; surgery.