The Experts below are selected from a list of 321 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
In-ho Jeon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Improvement of arthroscopic surgical performance using a new wide-angle Arthroscope in the surgical training
PLOS ONE, 2019Co-Authors: Jae-man Kwak, Erica Kholinne, Maulik J. Gandhi, Arnold Adikrishna, Hanpyo Hong, In-ho JeonAbstract:BACKGROUND: We have developed a new Arthroscope with a field of view of 150°. This Arthroscope requires less motion to maneuver and exhibits reduced optical error. It also improves how novices learn arthroscopy. We hypothesized that the surgical performance with this Arthroscope is superior to that with a conventional Arthroscope. This study tested the hypothesis by using motion analysis and a new validated parameter, "dimensionless squared jerk" (DSJ). METHODS: We compared the surgical performance between the use of the wide-angle Arthroscope and that of the conventional Arthroscope among 14 novice orthopedic residents who performed 3 standardized tasks 3 times with each Arthroscope. The tasks simulated the surgical skills in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The Arthroscope motion was analyzed using an optical tracking system. The differences in performance parameters, such as the time taken to complete the tasks, average acceleration of the hands (m/s2), number of movements, and total path length (m) including DSJ between the 2 Arthroscopes were investigated using paired t-tests. RESULTS: All estimated values for the tasks using the 150° Arthroscope were lower than those for the tasks using the 105° Arthroscope. Statistically significant differences in performance between the 2 Arthroscopes were observed only for DSJ (p = 0.014) and average acceleration (p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: DSJ and average acceleration are reliable parameters for representing hand-eye coordination. The surgical performance of novice arthroscopists was better with the new wide-angle Arthroscope than with the conventional Arthroscope.
-
Improvement of arthroscopic surgical performance using a new wide-angle Arthroscope
bioRxiv, 2018Co-Authors: Jae-man Kwak, Erica Kholinne, In-ho JeonAbstract:Background: We have developed a new Arthroscope with a field of view of 150{degrees}. This has proved that it requires less motion to maneuver, and optical error is decreased. It also improves how novices learn arthroscopy. We hypothesized that surgical performance using this Arthroscope would be superior to that using a conventional Arthroscope. This study tested the hypothesis using motion analysis and a new validated parameter "dimensionless squared jolt" (DSJ). Methods: We compared the surgical performance using between the wide-angle and the conventional Arthroscope among 14 novice orthopedic residents who performed three standardized tasks three times with each Arthroscope. The tasks simulated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgical skills. Their motion was analyzed using an optical tracking system, and differences in performance parameters, such as time taken, average acceleration of the hands (m/s2), the number of movements and the total path length (m) including DSJ between the two Arthroscopes were investigated using paired t-tests. Results: All the estimated values for the tasks using the 150{degrees} Arthroscope were lower than those for the 105{degrees} Arthroscope. There were statistically significant differences in performance between the two Arthroscopes only for DSJ (p = 0.014) and average acceleration (p = 0.039). Conclusions: DSJ and average acceleration are reliable parameters for representing hand-eye coordination. The surgical performance of novice arthroscopists was better with the new wide-angle Arthroscope than with the conventional Arthroscope.
-
Comparative analysis of visual field and image distortion in 30° and 70° Arthroscopes
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2016Co-Authors: Aashay L. Kekatpure, Jae-myung Chun, Arnold Adikrishna, In-ho JeonAbstract:Purpose There have been very few attempts to compare the visual fields and image distortion in Arthroscopes. To better understand the images generated using existing Arthroscopes, we performed image-mapping experiments to assess field of view and image distortion. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the visual fields obtained using 30° and 70° Arthroscopes and assess image distortion in each Arthroscope. Methods A complete arthroscopy system was used in this study. To perform this quantitative analysis, we created a customized measurement device that consisted of three parts: (1) distance marker, (2) chessboard pattern, and (3) angle marker. Three observers collectively assessed the appropriate position of the Arthroscope during simulation. For each scope, ten simulations were performed at distances between 1 and 3 cm. Using the obtained Arthroscope images, field of view and image distortion were measured and calculated. Results The field of view of the 70° Arthroscope was 5, 10, and 15 mm wider in diameter in comparison with the 30° Arthroscope at 1, 2, and 3 cm, respectively. Moreover, the 70° Arthroscope had less 0.66, 0.13, and 0.26 pixels of root-mean-square distance than the 30° Arthroscope at 1, 2, and 3 cm, respectively. The 70° Arthroscope also contained 0.78 pixels less at the maximal error than the average 30° Arthroscope. Therefore, the 70° Arthroscope demonstrated less distortion than the 30° Arthroscope. There was no significant difference between the two scopes with respect to median curvature measurement at 1-cm distance. Conclusion The 70° Arthroscope demonstrates technical advantages over the 30° Arthroscope, including a wider field of view and a less image distortion at the periphery. A wide angle and less image distortion can help better orient the surgeon within the joint cavity when a panoramic picture is needed to repair rotator cuff tears, in case of hip arthroscopy, or while treating the lesions of posterior horn of medial meniscus.
-
Comparative analysis of visual field and image distortion in 30° and 70° Arthroscopes
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2014Co-Authors: Aashay L. Kekatpure, Jae-myung Chun, Arnold Adikrishna, In-ho JeonAbstract:Purpose There have been very few attempts to compare the visual fields and image distortion in Arthroscopes. To better understand the images generated using existing Arthroscopes, we performed image-mapping experiments to assess field of view and image distortion. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the visual fields obtained using 30° and 70° Arthroscopes and assess image distortion in each Arthroscope.
Aashay L. Kekatpure - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Comparative analysis of visual field and image distortion in 30° and 70° Arthroscopes
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2016Co-Authors: Aashay L. Kekatpure, Jae-myung Chun, Arnold Adikrishna, In-ho JeonAbstract:Purpose There have been very few attempts to compare the visual fields and image distortion in Arthroscopes. To better understand the images generated using existing Arthroscopes, we performed image-mapping experiments to assess field of view and image distortion. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the visual fields obtained using 30° and 70° Arthroscopes and assess image distortion in each Arthroscope. Methods A complete arthroscopy system was used in this study. To perform this quantitative analysis, we created a customized measurement device that consisted of three parts: (1) distance marker, (2) chessboard pattern, and (3) angle marker. Three observers collectively assessed the appropriate position of the Arthroscope during simulation. For each scope, ten simulations were performed at distances between 1 and 3 cm. Using the obtained Arthroscope images, field of view and image distortion were measured and calculated. Results The field of view of the 70° Arthroscope was 5, 10, and 15 mm wider in diameter in comparison with the 30° Arthroscope at 1, 2, and 3 cm, respectively. Moreover, the 70° Arthroscope had less 0.66, 0.13, and 0.26 pixels of root-mean-square distance than the 30° Arthroscope at 1, 2, and 3 cm, respectively. The 70° Arthroscope also contained 0.78 pixels less at the maximal error than the average 30° Arthroscope. Therefore, the 70° Arthroscope demonstrated less distortion than the 30° Arthroscope. There was no significant difference between the two scopes with respect to median curvature measurement at 1-cm distance. Conclusion The 70° Arthroscope demonstrates technical advantages over the 30° Arthroscope, including a wider field of view and a less image distortion at the periphery. A wide angle and less image distortion can help better orient the surgeon within the joint cavity when a panoramic picture is needed to repair rotator cuff tears, in case of hip arthroscopy, or while treating the lesions of posterior horn of medial meniscus.
-
Comparative analysis of visual field and image distortion in 30° and 70° Arthroscopes
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2014Co-Authors: Aashay L. Kekatpure, Jae-myung Chun, Arnold Adikrishna, In-ho JeonAbstract:Purpose There have been very few attempts to compare the visual fields and image distortion in Arthroscopes. To better understand the images generated using existing Arthroscopes, we performed image-mapping experiments to assess field of view and image distortion. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the visual fields obtained using 30° and 70° Arthroscopes and assess image distortion in each Arthroscope.
Arnold Adikrishna - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Improvement of arthroscopic surgical performance using a new wide-angle Arthroscope in the surgical training
PLOS ONE, 2019Co-Authors: Jae-man Kwak, Erica Kholinne, Maulik J. Gandhi, Arnold Adikrishna, Hanpyo Hong, In-ho JeonAbstract:BACKGROUND: We have developed a new Arthroscope with a field of view of 150°. This Arthroscope requires less motion to maneuver and exhibits reduced optical error. It also improves how novices learn arthroscopy. We hypothesized that the surgical performance with this Arthroscope is superior to that with a conventional Arthroscope. This study tested the hypothesis by using motion analysis and a new validated parameter, "dimensionless squared jerk" (DSJ). METHODS: We compared the surgical performance between the use of the wide-angle Arthroscope and that of the conventional Arthroscope among 14 novice orthopedic residents who performed 3 standardized tasks 3 times with each Arthroscope. The tasks simulated the surgical skills in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The Arthroscope motion was analyzed using an optical tracking system. The differences in performance parameters, such as the time taken to complete the tasks, average acceleration of the hands (m/s2), number of movements, and total path length (m) including DSJ between the 2 Arthroscopes were investigated using paired t-tests. RESULTS: All estimated values for the tasks using the 150° Arthroscope were lower than those for the tasks using the 105° Arthroscope. Statistically significant differences in performance between the 2 Arthroscopes were observed only for DSJ (p = 0.014) and average acceleration (p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: DSJ and average acceleration are reliable parameters for representing hand-eye coordination. The surgical performance of novice arthroscopists was better with the new wide-angle Arthroscope than with the conventional Arthroscope.
-
Comparative analysis of visual field and image distortion in 30° and 70° Arthroscopes
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2016Co-Authors: Aashay L. Kekatpure, Jae-myung Chun, Arnold Adikrishna, In-ho JeonAbstract:Purpose There have been very few attempts to compare the visual fields and image distortion in Arthroscopes. To better understand the images generated using existing Arthroscopes, we performed image-mapping experiments to assess field of view and image distortion. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the visual fields obtained using 30° and 70° Arthroscopes and assess image distortion in each Arthroscope. Methods A complete arthroscopy system was used in this study. To perform this quantitative analysis, we created a customized measurement device that consisted of three parts: (1) distance marker, (2) chessboard pattern, and (3) angle marker. Three observers collectively assessed the appropriate position of the Arthroscope during simulation. For each scope, ten simulations were performed at distances between 1 and 3 cm. Using the obtained Arthroscope images, field of view and image distortion were measured and calculated. Results The field of view of the 70° Arthroscope was 5, 10, and 15 mm wider in diameter in comparison with the 30° Arthroscope at 1, 2, and 3 cm, respectively. Moreover, the 70° Arthroscope had less 0.66, 0.13, and 0.26 pixels of root-mean-square distance than the 30° Arthroscope at 1, 2, and 3 cm, respectively. The 70° Arthroscope also contained 0.78 pixels less at the maximal error than the average 30° Arthroscope. Therefore, the 70° Arthroscope demonstrated less distortion than the 30° Arthroscope. There was no significant difference between the two scopes with respect to median curvature measurement at 1-cm distance. Conclusion The 70° Arthroscope demonstrates technical advantages over the 30° Arthroscope, including a wider field of view and a less image distortion at the periphery. A wide angle and less image distortion can help better orient the surgeon within the joint cavity when a panoramic picture is needed to repair rotator cuff tears, in case of hip arthroscopy, or while treating the lesions of posterior horn of medial meniscus.
-
Comparative analysis of visual field and image distortion in 30° and 70° Arthroscopes
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2014Co-Authors: Aashay L. Kekatpure, Jae-myung Chun, Arnold Adikrishna, In-ho JeonAbstract:Purpose There have been very few attempts to compare the visual fields and image distortion in Arthroscopes. To better understand the images generated using existing Arthroscopes, we performed image-mapping experiments to assess field of view and image distortion. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the visual fields obtained using 30° and 70° Arthroscopes and assess image distortion in each Arthroscope.
Francesc Malagelada - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
anatomic lectures on structures at risk prior to cadaveric courses reduce injury to the superficial peroneal nerve the commonest complication in ankle arthroscopy
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2020Co-Authors: Jordi Vega, Jón Karlsson, Francesc Malagelada, Matteo Guelfi, Gino M M J Kerkhoffs, Miki DalmaupastorAbstract:To assess the effectiveness of cadaveric ankle arthroscopy courses in reducing iatrogenic injuries. A total of 60 novice surgeons enrolled in a basic cadaveric ankle arthroscopy course were divided into two groups. Group A (n = 32) was lectured on portal placement and use of the Arthroscope, whereas group B (n = 28) was in addition lectured on specific portal-related complications. Following the performance of anterior ankle arthroscopy and hindfoot endoscopy, the specimens were dissected and carefully assessed for detection of any iatrogenic injuries. The rate of injury to the superficial peroneal nerve (SPN) was reduced from 25 to 3.6%, in group A compared with B (p = 0.033). Injuries to the peroneus tertius or extensor digitorum longus, the flexor hallucis longus and the tibial nerve or the Achilles tendon were also reduced in group B. Overall, the number of uninjured specimens was 50% (n = 30) and higher in group B (57%) than group A (44%). Lesions to the plantaris tendon, the sural nerve or the posterior tibial artery were more common in group B, however, without reaching statistical significance. Overall, 25 (13.9%) anatomic structures were injured in anterior arthroscopy compared to 18 (5%) in hindfoot endoscopy, out of a potential total of 180 and 360, respectively (p = 0.001). Dedicated lectures on portal-related complications have proven useful in reducing the risk of injury to the SPN, the commonest iatrogenic injury encountered in ankle arthroscopy. Hindfoot endoscopy is significantly safer than anterior ankle arthroscopy in terms of injury to anatomical structures.
-
Ankle Arthroscopy: An Update
The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 2017Co-Authors: Jordi Vega, Miki Dalmau-pastor, Francesc Malagelada, Betlem Fargues-polo, Fernando A PenaAbstract:A number of evidence-based arthroscopic techniques have been advocated to treat ankle pathology, including ankle instability, impingement, osteochondral lesions, and end-stage osteoarthritis.For anterior ankle arthroscopy, one technique that has gained favor involves insertion of the Arthroscope wit
Gino M M J Kerkhoffs - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
anatomic lectures on structures at risk prior to cadaveric courses reduce injury to the superficial peroneal nerve the commonest complication in ankle arthroscopy
Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, 2020Co-Authors: Jordi Vega, Jón Karlsson, Francesc Malagelada, Matteo Guelfi, Gino M M J Kerkhoffs, Miki DalmaupastorAbstract:To assess the effectiveness of cadaveric ankle arthroscopy courses in reducing iatrogenic injuries. A total of 60 novice surgeons enrolled in a basic cadaveric ankle arthroscopy course were divided into two groups. Group A (n = 32) was lectured on portal placement and use of the Arthroscope, whereas group B (n = 28) was in addition lectured on specific portal-related complications. Following the performance of anterior ankle arthroscopy and hindfoot endoscopy, the specimens were dissected and carefully assessed for detection of any iatrogenic injuries. The rate of injury to the superficial peroneal nerve (SPN) was reduced from 25 to 3.6%, in group A compared with B (p = 0.033). Injuries to the peroneus tertius or extensor digitorum longus, the flexor hallucis longus and the tibial nerve or the Achilles tendon were also reduced in group B. Overall, the number of uninjured specimens was 50% (n = 30) and higher in group B (57%) than group A (44%). Lesions to the plantaris tendon, the sural nerve or the posterior tibial artery were more common in group B, however, without reaching statistical significance. Overall, 25 (13.9%) anatomic structures were injured in anterior arthroscopy compared to 18 (5%) in hindfoot endoscopy, out of a potential total of 180 and 360, respectively (p = 0.001). Dedicated lectures on portal-related complications have proven useful in reducing the risk of injury to the SPN, the commonest iatrogenic injury encountered in ankle arthroscopy. Hindfoot endoscopy is significantly safer than anterior ankle arthroscopy in terms of injury to anatomical structures.
