4. Laryngoscope, 128:403-411, 2018.

Button batteries (BB) are found in common household items and can lead to significant morbidity and mortality in the pediatric population when ingested. BBs are made of various chemistries and have a unique size and shape that yield significant injury when lodged in the pediatric esophagus. BBs create a local tissue pH environment of 10 to 13 and can induce liquefactive necrosis at the negative pole. This initial injury can progress with further tissue breakdown even after removal. Unfortunately, patients may present with vague symptoms similar to viral illnesses and there is not always a known history of ingestion. Plain film X‐ray can be diagnostic. Exposure can lead to caustic injury within 2 hours. Thus, timely endoscopic removal is the mainstay of treatment. Novel mitigation and neutralization strategies have been implemented into treatment guidelines. These include the preremoval ingestion of honey or sucralfate and intraoperative irrigation with acetic acid. Depending on the severity of injury following removal, careful consideration should be given for potential delayed complications including fistulization into major vessels which often leads to death. The National Button Battery Taskforce and several industry members have implemented prevention strategies such as educational safety outreach campaigns, child‐resistant packaging changes, and warning labels. Governmental regulation and industry changes are key to limit not only the amount of BB ingestions, but also the devastating consequences that can result. Anonymous reporting of BB injuries through the Global Injury Research Collaborative has been made convenient and centralized through the advent of a user‐friendly smartphone iOS/App Store and Android/GooglePlay application called the “GIRC App”; all specialists who manage foreign body cases should contribute their cases to help prevent future injuries. BB ingestion must be recognized and treated promptly using a multidisciplinary approach to optimize outcomes for these patients. Ultimately, a safer BB technology is critically needed to reduce or eliminate the severe and life‐threatening injuries in children. Level of Evidence 5

Purpose of review The field of temporal bone simulation (TBS) has largely focused on the development and validation of simulators as training and assessment tools. However, as technology has progressed over the years, researchers have envisioned new clinical applications for simulators extending to pre-operative surgical planning and case rehearsal. The purpose of this article is to review the current state of the art in TBS and to highlight recent advancements in the field. Due to space limitations, we will limit our discussion to computer-based virtual reality (VR) simulators. Recent findings A review of the recent literature on TBS revealed very limited application of VR simulators for pre-operative preparation. Current evidence suggests limitations in fidelity preclude successful patient-specific case rehearsal using VR simulation. Further investigation and clinical evaluation are required to validate its use outside of training and skill assessment. Summary This article provides an overview of the current use of VR simulators with emphasis on pre-operative planning. We evaluate the limitations of the technology, and discuss potential areas of improvement for the future. More studies are necessary to assess the value of VR simulation for pre-operative preparation.

Objective The aim of this report is to provide a review of the current literature for assessment of performance for mastoidectomy, to identify the current assessment tools available in the literature, and to summarize the evidence for their validity. Data Sources The MEDLINE database was accessed via PubMed. Review Methods Inclusion criteria consisted of English-language published articles that reported use of a mastoidectomy performance assessment tool. Studies ranged from 2007 to November 2015, and were divided into two groups: intra-operative assessments or those performed with simulation (cadaveric laboratory or virtual reality). Studies that contained specific reliability analyses were also highlighted. For each publication, validity evidence data was analyzed and interpreted based on conceptual definitions provided in a recent systematic review on the modern framework of validity evidence. Conclusions Twenty-three studies were identified that met our inclusion criteria for review including four intra-operative objective assessment studies, five cadaveric studies, ten virtual reality (VR) simulation studies, and four that used both cadaveric and VR. Implications for Practice A review of the literature revealed a wide variety of mastoidectomy assessment tools and varying levels of reliability and validity evidence. The assessment tool developed at Johns Hopkins possesses the most validity evidence of those reviewed. However, there are a number of agreed upon specific metrics which could be integrated into a standardized assessment instrument to be used nationally. A universally agreed upon assessment tool will provide a means for developing standardized benchmarks for performing mastoid surgery.

No abstract