Robotic microlaryngeal surgery: a new retractor that provides improved access to the glottis

Potential of robotic systems in phonosurgery

There has been rapid growth in the utilization of robotic surgery in the head and neck. Its utilization in the phonosurgical space has lagged owing to difficulty with access and exposure to the laryngeal site, small working space due to the size of the larynx and the need to work around an endotracheal tube. The goal of this work is to explore recent developments in robotic microlaryngeal surgery. At this time robotic instrumentation is available; however, the range of instruments is not as extensive to match the current microlaryngeal instrumentation that exists for traditional endoscopic surgery. Studies have demonstrated the ability to perform phonosurgery safely with currently available robotic systems but exposure is less than ideal. Work is been undertaken to develop specialized transoral robotic retractors which will improve visualization and allow the robotic instrument to reach the glottis, which has traditionally been the most difficult to area to access.  Additional studies will be needed to assess the application of these systems to more patient populations, and prospective research will be required to compare outcomes of traditional phonosurgery to robotic phonosurgery.

Robotic microlaryngeal phonosurgery: Testing of a "steady-hand" microsurgery platform

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To evaluate gains in microlaryngeal precision achieved by using a novel robotic "steady hand" microsurgery platform in performing simulated phonosurgical tasks.

STUDY DESIGN

Crossover comparative study of surgical performance and descriptive analysis of surgeon feedback.

METHODS

A novel robotic ear, nose, and throat microsurgery system (REMS) was tested in simulated phonosurgery. Participants navigated a 0.4-mm-wide microlaryngeal needle through spirals of varying widths, both with and without robotic assistance. Fail time (time the needle contacted spiral edges) was measured, and statistical comparison was performed. Participants were surveyed to provide subjective feedback on the REMS.

RESULTS

Nine participants performed the task at three spiral widths, yielding 27 paired testing conditions. In 24 of 27 conditions, robot-assisted performance was better than unassisted; five trials were errorless, all achieved with the robot. Paired analysis of all conditions revealed fail time of 0.769 ± 0.568 seconds manually, improving to 0.284 ± 0.584 seconds with the robot (P = .003). Analysis of individual spiral sizes showed statistically better performance with the REMS at spiral widths of 2 mm (0.156 ± 0.226 seconds vs. 0.549 ± 0.545 seconds, P = .019) and 1.5 mm (0.075 ± 0.099 seconds vs. 0.890 ± 0.518 seconds, P = .002). At 1.2 mm, all nine participants together showed similar performance with and without robotic assistance (0.621 ± 0.923 seconds vs. 0.868 ± 0.634 seconds, P = .52), though subgroup analysis of five surgeons most familiar with microlaryngoscopy showed statistically better performance with the robot (0.204 ± 0.164 seconds vs. 0.664 ± 0.354 seconds, P = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

The REMS is a novel platform with potential applications in microlaryngeal phonosurgery. Further feasibility studies and preclinical testing should be pursued as a bridge to eventual clinical use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA. Laryngoscope, 128:126-132, 2018.