Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-zlvph Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T04:27:29.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feasibility of ovine and synthetic temporal bone models for simulation training in endoscopic ear surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2019

S Okhovat ,
T D Milner  and
A Iyer
S Okhovat
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, Scotland, UK
T D Milner*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, Scotland, UK
A Iyer
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, Scotland, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Mr Thomas Milner, Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Monklands, Monkscourt Ave, Airdrie ML6 0JS, Scotland, UK E-mail: tommilner1@doctors.org.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

Comparing the feasibility of ovine and synthetic temporal bones for simulating endoscopic ear surgery against the ‘gold standard’ of human cadaveric tissue.

Methods

A total of 10 candidates (5 trainees and 5 experts) performed endoscopic tympanoplasty on 3 models: Pettigrew temporal bones, ovine temporal bones and cadaveric temporal bones. Candidates completed a questionnaire assessing the face validity, global content validity and task-specific content validity of each model.

Results

Regarding ovine temporal bone validity, the median values were 4 (interquartile range = 4–4) for face validity, 4 (interquartile range = 4–4) for global content validity and 4 (interquartile range = 4–4) for task-specific content validity. For the Pettigrew temporal bone, the median values were 3.5 (interquartile range = 2.25–4) for face validity, 3 (interquartile range = 2.75–3) for global content validity and 3 (interquartile range = 2.5–3) for task-specific content validity. The ovine temporal bone was considered significantly superior to the Pettigrew temporal bone for the majority of validity categories assessed.

Conclusion

Tympanoplasty is feasible in both the ovine temporal bone and the Pettigrew temporal bone. However, the ovine model was a significantly more realistic simulation tool.

Keywords

EndoscopyEarSurgerySimulation TrainingTympanoplastyModelsAnimal

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 133 , Issue 11 , November 2019 , pp. 966 - 973
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Mr T Milner takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

1Kiringoda, R, Kozin, ED, Lee, DJ. Outcomes in endoscopic ear surgery. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2016;49:1271–90Google Scholar
2Doğan, S, Bayraktar, C. Endoscopic tympanoplasty: learning curve for a surgeon already trained in microscopic tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:1853–810.1007/s00405-016-4428-0Google Scholar
3Sturm, LP, Windsor, JA, Cosman, PH, Cregan, P, Hewett, PJ, Maddern, GJ. A systematic review of skills transfer after surgical simulation training. Ann Surg 2008;248:166–79Google Scholar
4Sutherland, LM, Middleton, PF, Anthony, A, Hamdorf, J, Cregan, P, Scott, D et al. Surgical simulation: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2006;243:291–300Google Scholar
5Awad, Z, Ahmed, S, Taghi, AS, Ghufoor, K, Wareing, MJ, Patel, N et al. Feasibility of a synthetic temporal bone for training in mastoidectomy: face, content, and concurrent validity. Otol Neurotol 2014;35:1813–18Google Scholar
6Gocer, C, Eryilmaz, A, Genc, U, Dagli, M, Karabulut, H, Iriz, A. An alternative model for stapedectomy training in residency program: sheep cadaver ear. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2007;264:1409–1210.1007/s00405-007-0437-3Google Scholar
7Cordero, A, del mar Medina, M, Alonso, A, Labatut, T. Stapedectomy in sheep: an animal model for surgical training. Otol Neurotol 2011;32:742–7Google Scholar
8Schnabl, J, Glueckert, R, Feuchtner, G, Recheis, W, Potrusil, T, Kuhn, V et al. Sheep as a large animal model for middle and inner ear implantable hearing devices: a feasibility study in cadavers. Otol Neurotol 2012;33:481–9Google Scholar
9Awad, Z, Taghi, A, Sethukumar, P, Tolley, NS. Construct validity of the ovine model in endoscopic sinus surgery training. Laryngoscope 2015;125:539–4310.1002/lary.24927Google Scholar
10The R Project for Statistical Computing. In: http://www.r-project.org [24 September 2019]Google Scholar
11Cordero, A, Benítez, S, Reyes, P, Vaca, M, Polo, R, Pérez, C et al. Ovine ear model for fully endoscopic stapedectomy training. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015;272:2167–74Google Scholar
12Mantokoudis, G, Huth, ME, Weisstanner, C, Friedrich, HM, Nauer, C, Candreia, C et al. Lamb temporal bone as a surgical training model of round window cochlear implant electrode insertion. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:52–6Google Scholar
13Anschuetz, L, Bonali, M, Ghirelli, M, Mattioli, F, Villari, D, Caversaccio, M et al. An ovine model for exclusive endoscopic ear surgery. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017;143:24–52Google Scholar
14Seibel, VA, Lavinsky, L, De Oliveira, JA. Morphometric study of the external and middle ear anatomy in sheep: a possible model for ear experiments. Clin Anat 2006;19:503–9Google Scholar
15Seibel, VA, Lavinsky, L, Irion, K. CT-scan sheep and human inner ear morphometric comparison. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2006;72:370–6Google Scholar
16Bhutta, MF. A review of simulation platforms in surgery of the temporal bone. Clin Otolaryngol 2016;41:539–45Google Scholar
17Takahashi, K, Morita, Y, Ohshima, S, Izumi, S, Kubota, Y, Yamamoto, Y et al. Creating an optimal 3D printed model for temporal bone dissection training. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2017;126:530–6Google Scholar