» Articles » PMID: 37706085

Risk for Surgical Team Hearing Loss With Vitrectomy

Overview
Publisher Sage Publications
Date 2023 Sep 14
PMID 37706085
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To assess sound-level exposure during vitrectomy using 3 of the most common commercially available machines. This noninterventional cross-sectional study examined sound emission from the Constellation, Stellaris, and EVA vitrector systems. For each machine, a noise dosimeter was used to measure the sound-level exposure of the surgeon during 3 surgical cases in which vitrectomy was performed. Sound levels associated with progressively increasing cut rates and vacuum pressures were also measured. Finally, sound measurements were taken during the use of various additional functions of each machine, including diathermy, laser, and extrusion. Sound levels were compared with occupational health guidelines in Canada and the United States. The maximum sound level recorded during vitrectomy surgery was 88.2 dBA. The mean sound level during vitrectomy surgical cases ranged from 58.5 to 66.8 dBA. A strong positive linear correlation was found between the cut rate and sound level ( = 0.88-0.98) and the vacuum pressure and sound level ( = 0.83-0.97). This relationship was consistent across the 3 vitrector systems ( < .001). Noise exposure during vitrectomy procedures was acceptable but may be sufficient for surgical team activity interference, as described by World Health Organization recommendations. A strong correlation was found between the cut rate and noise exposure. If cut rates continue to increase, attention should be given to ensure that the resulting noise exposure does not threaten the hearing of vitreoretinal surgeons and the operating room staff.

Citing Articles

Democratizing Vitreoretinal Surgery Training With a Portable and Affordable Virtual Reality Simulator in the Metaverse.

Antaki F, Doucet C, Milad D, Giguere C, Ozell B, Hammamji K Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024; 13(4):5.

PMID: 38564199 PMC: 10996990. DOI: 10.1167/tvst.13.4.5.

References
1.
Brown C, Emmett S, Robler S, Tucci D . Global Hearing Loss Prevention. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2018; 51(3):575-592. DOI: 10.1016/j.otc.2018.01.006. View

2.
Tayyab H, Jamil S, Hashmi S . In Vitro Comparison of Various High-Speed Vitrectomy Machines Using Dual Blade Cutters. Cureus. 2021; 13(5):e15021. PMC: 8197787. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.15021. View

3.
Kirchner D, Evenson E, Dobie R, Rabinowitz P, Crawford J, Kopke R . Occupational noise-induced hearing loss: ACOEM Task Force on Occupational Hearing Loss. J Occup Environ Med. 2011; 54(1):106-8. DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0b013e318242677d. View

4.
Sampieri G, Namavarian A, Levin M, Philteos J, Lee J, Koskinen A . Noise in Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery operating rooms: a systematic review. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021; 50(1):8. PMC: 7879658. DOI: 10.1186/s40463-020-00487-6. View

5.
Oliveira P, Berger A, Chow D . Vitreoretinal instruments: vitrectomy cutters, endoillumination and wide-angle viewing systems. Int J Retina Vitreous. 2016; 2:28. PMC: 5137208. DOI: 10.1186/s40942-016-0052-9. View