Good arthroscopic view is important to perform arthroscopic operations (minimally invasive surgery in joints) safely and fast. To obtain this, the joint is irrigated. However, optimal irrigation settings are not described. To study the complex clinical practice of irrigation, a physical simulation environment was developed that incorporates the main characteristics for performing arthroscopy. Its irrigation capacities were validated with patient data. The physical simulation environment consists of a specially designed knee phantom, all normally used arthroscopic equipment, and registration devices for two video streams, pressures, and flows. The physical embodiment of the knee phantom matches that of human knee joints during arthroscopic operations by the presence of important anatomic structures in sizes comparable to human knee joints, the presence of access portals, and the ability to stress the joint. The hydrostatic and hydrodynamic behavior of the knee phantom was validated with pressure and flow measurements documented during arthroscopic knee operations. Surgeons confirmed that the knee phantom imitated human knee joints sufficiently. The hydrostatic parameters of the knee phantom could be tuned within the range of the human knee joints (restriction: 0.026629.3Ns2/m8 versus 0.01431.22×1018Ns2/m8 and capacitance: 6.89m5/N versus 7.50×109m5/N). The hydrodynamic properties of the knee phantom were acceptably comparable to those of the human knee joints. The physical simulation environment enables realistic and conditioned experimental studies to optimize joint irrigation. The foundation has been laid for evaluation of other surgical instruments and of training of surgical skills.

1.
Morgan
,
C. D.
, 1987, “
Fluid Delivery Systems for Arthroscopy
,”
Arthroscopy: J. Relat. Surg.
0749-8063,
3
(
4
), pp.
288
291
.
2.
Ogilvie-Harris
,
D. J.
, and
Weisleder
,
L.
, 1995, “
Fluid Pump Systems for Arthroscopy: A Comparison of Pressure Control Versus Pressure and Flow Control
,”
Arthroscopy: J. Relat. Surg.
0749-8063,
11
(
5
), pp.
591
595
.
3.
Muellner
,
T.
,
Menth-Chiari
,
W. A.
,
Reihsner
,
R.
,
Eberhardsteiner
,
J.
, and
Engebretsen
,
L.
, 2001, “
Accuracy of Pressure and Flow Capacities of Four Arthroscopic Fluid Management Systems
,”
Arthroscopy: J. Relat. Surg.
0749-8063,
17
(
7
), pp.
760
764
.
4.
Tuijthof
,
G. J.
,
Dusee
,
L.
,
Herder
,
J. L.
,
van Dijk
,
C. N.
, and
Pistecky
,
P. V.
, 2005, “
Behavior of Arthroscopic Irrigation Systems
,”
Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc
0942-2056,
13
(
3
), pp.
238
246
.
5.
Tuijthof
,
G. J.
,
Sierevelt
,
I. N.
, and
van Dijk
,
C. N.
, 2007, “
Disturbances in the Arthroscopic View Defined With Video Analysis
,”
Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc
0942-2056,
15
(
9
), pp.
1101
1106
.
6.
Tuijthof
,
G. J. M.
,
van den Boomen
,
H.
,
van Heerwaarden
,
R. J.
, and
van Dijk
,
C. N.
, 2008, “
Comparison of Two Arthroscopic Pump Systems Based on Image Quality
,”
Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc
0942-2056,
16
(
6
), pp.
590
594
.
7.
Ampat
,
G.
,
Bruguera
,
J.
, and
Copeland
,
S. A.
, 1997, “
Aquaflo Pump vs FMS 4 Pump for Shoulder Arthroscopic Surgery
,”
Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl.
0035-8843,
79
, pp.
341
344
.
8.
Mabrey
,
J. D.
,
Cannon
,
W. D.
,
Gillogly
,
S. D.
,
Kasser
,
J. R.
,
Sweeney
,
H. J.
,
Zarins
,
B.
,
Mevis
,
H.
,
Garrett
,
W. E.
, and
Poss
,
R.
, 2000, “
Development of a Virtual Reality Arthroscopic Knee Simulator
,”
Stud. Health Technol. Inform.
0926-9630,
70
, pp.
192
194
.
9.
Pedowitz
,
R. A.
,
Esch
,
J.
, and
Snyder
,
S.
, 2002, “
Evaluation of a Virtual Reality Simulator for Arthroscopy Skills Development
,”
Arthroscopy: J. Relat. Surg.
0749-8063,
18
(
6
), p.
E29
.
10.
Riener
,
R.
,
Frey
,
M.
,
Proll
,
T.
,
Regenfelder
,
F.
, and
Burgkart
,
R.
, 2004, “
Phantom-Based Multimodal Interactions for Medical Education and Training: The Munich Knee Joint Simulator
,”
IEEE Trans. Inf. Technol. Biomed.
1089-7771,
8
(
2
), pp.
208
216
.
11.
van Dijk
,
C. N.
, 2002,
Beweegredenen, de patient als bron van inspiratie
,
Inaugural University of Amsterdam
,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
.
12.
Dolk
,
T.
, and
Augustini
,
B. G.
, 1989, “
Three Irrigation Systems for Motorized Arthroscopic Surgery: A Comparative Experimental and Clinical Study
,”
Arthroscopy: J. Relat. Surg.
0749-8063,
5
(
4
), pp.
307
314
.
13.
Tuijthof
,
G. J.
,
Herder
,
J. L.
, and
van Dijk
,
C. N.
, 2008, “
Experimental Approach to Study Arthroscopic Irrigation
,”
Med. Eng. Phys.
1350-4533,
30
(
8
), pp.
1071
1078
.
14.
Pacific Research Laboratories, Inc.
, “
Sawbones
,” http://www.sawbones.com/http://www.sawbones.com/.
15.
Hillway Surgical Ltd.
, “
Advanced Models for Simulated Surgery
,” http://www.surgimodels.com/default.htmhttp://www.surgimodels.com/default.htm.
16.
Tatari
,
H.
,
Dervisbey
,
M.
,
Muratli
,
K.
, and
Ergor
,
A.
, 2005, “
Report of Experience in 190 Patients With the Use of Closed Suction Drainage in Arthroscopic Knee Procedures
,”
Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc
0942-2056,
13
(
6
), pp.
458
462
.
17.
Sisk
,
T. D.
, 1987, “
Arthroscopy of Knee and Ankle
,”
Campbell’s Operative Orthopedics
,
A. H.
Crenshaw
, ed.,
Mosby
,
St. Louis, MO
, pp.
2547
2608
.
18.
Brophy
,
R.
,
Dunn
,
W.
, and
Wickiewicz
,
T.
, 2004, “
Arthroscopic Portal Placement
,”
Tech. Knee Surg.
,
3
(
1
), pp.
2
7
. 1536-0636
19.
Oretorp
,
N.
, and
Elmersson
,
S.
, 1986, “
Arthroscopy and Irrigation Control
,”
Arthroscopy: J. Relat. Surg.
0749-8063,
2
(
1
), pp.
46
50
.
20.
Leijdens
,
H.
, 1992,
Stroming en warmteoverdracht I
,
DUT
,
Delft, The Netherlands
, in Dutch.
You do not currently have access to this content.