Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 128, Issue 10, pp 1123–1126 | Cite as

Usefulness of a head mounted monitor device for viewing intraoperative fluoroscopy during orthopaedic procedures

Orthopaedic Surgery

Abstract

We report our case series involving the use of a MicroOptical™ (MicroOptical™ Corporation, Westwood, MA, USA) head mounted, computer display monitor during orthopaedic procedures such as open reduction and internal fracture fixations and spinal pedicle screw placement. Since the MicroOptical™ viewer does not fully obstruct the surgeon’s direct vision, he/she may continue to operate and focus on the operative field while viewing the MicroOptical™ image. Our first 50 clinical applications demonstrate that when viewing the MicroOptical® monitor there is a significant reduction in the total number of times the surgeon left the attention of the operative field and/or may have been exposed to fluoroscopy radiation by unprotected body turn exposure. In addition, the MicroOptical® viewer did not cause any surgical field viewing obstruction during surgical procedures and there was not a difference in reported surgeon eye fatigue when comparing the MicroOptical® viewer to standard fluoroscopy.

Keywords

Head mounted monitor Intraoperative fluoroscopy Imaging Mobile fluoroscopy Radiographic exposure 

References

  1. 1.
    Badman BL, Rill L, Butkovich B, Arreola M, Griend RA (2005) Radiation exposure with use of the mini-C-arm for routine orthopaedic imaging procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:13–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barry TP (1984) Radiation exposure to an orthopedic surgeon. Clin Orthop Relat Res 182:160–164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Giachino AA, Cheng M (1980) Irradiation of the surgeon during pinning of femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 62-B:227–229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Levin PE, Schoen RW Jr, Browner BD (1987) Radiation exposure to the surgeon during closed interlocking intramedullary nailing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:761–766PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mehlman CT, DiPasquale TG (1997) Radiation exposure to the orthopaedic surgical team during fluoroscopy: “how far away is far enough?”. J Orthop Trauma 11:392–398PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    MicroOptical™ Critical data viewer pm, head mounted display, FDA approved device with regulation number: 876.1500. Listed date 2004Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Riley SA (1989) Radiation exposure from fluoroscopy during orthopedic surgical procedures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:257–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sanders R, Koval KJ, DiPasquale T, Schmelling G, Stenzler S, Ross E (1993) Exposure of the orthopaedic surgeon to radiation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75:326–330PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tremains MR, Georgiadis GM, Dennis MJ (2001) Radiation exposure with use of the inverted-c-arm technique in upper-extremity surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A:674–678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Van Staden G, Farrant K, Richards R, Bunker T (2000) Image intensifier position for hand and wrist fractures. Injury 31:351–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Ortega
    • 1
  • A. Wolff
    • 2
  • M. Baumgaertner
    • 2
  • D. Kendoff
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Sonoran Orthopaedic Trauma Surgeons, Scottsdale HealthcareScottsdaleUSA
  2. 2.Yale University Department of OrthopaedicsNew HavenUSA
  3. 3.Trauma DepartmentHannover Medical SchoolHannoverGermany
  4. 4.Orthopaedic DepartmentHospital for Special SurgeryNYUSA

Personalised recommendations