Multi-DOF (Degree of Freedom) Articulating Laparoscopic Instrument is an Effective Device in Performing Challenging Sutures

Sa-Hong Min, Yo-Seok Cho, Kibum Park, Yoontaek Lee, Young Suk Park, Sang-Hoon Ahn, Do Joong Park, Hyung-Ho Kim, Sa-Hong Min, Yo-Seok Cho, Kibum Park, Yoontaek Lee, Young Suk Park, Sang-Hoon Ahn, Do Joong Park, Hyung-Ho Kim

Abstract

Purpose: Although laparoscopic surgery had been performed in clinical practice for over 30 years, there has not been much improvement on instruments. Several articulating laparoscopic instruments have been developed including the robotic system. A new multi-degree of freedom (DOF) articulating laparoscopic device has been developed. We compared the ability to perform challenging sutures between the new device and the robotic system.

Methods: Five experienced surgeons with over 100 laparoscopic surgery cases performed the suture task with both instruments. Everyone was new at articulating instruments including a robotic system. The suturing task consisted of two vertical sutures, downward and upward vertical direction. The duration of needle grabbing, first surgical tie, square tie, and the final reverse tie was measured.

Results: When doing the downward suture, the median time to complete the suture was 127 vs. 136 seconds for ArtiSential® and the robot, respectively (p=0.754). Other measurements such as needle grabbing, first tie, second tie and final knot did not show any significant difference between the two instruments. Upward suture also did not show a significant difference. The total completion time was 127 vs. 112 seconds for for ArtiSential® and the robot, respectively (p=0.675). Time taken in each interval did not show any significant difference.

Conclusion: Both instruments performed the suturing tasks with no difference in duration. ArtiSential® can be mixed up with usual instruments. Surgeons can choose any device, but when articulation is needed, ArtiSential® could be an alternative choice to the robotic system.

Keywords: Articulation; Instrument; Laparoscopy; Robotics; Suture.

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST Yes (ArtiSential instruments were provided by LivsmedTM, Korea).

Copyright © 2019 The Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
ArtiSential® instrument handle. The thumb and the index finger, mainly used for grabbing, goes into the two holes on the handle. The movement of this handle and the end tool shows identical motion.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
ArtiSential® instrument hand-end tool coordination. The movement of the thumb, index finger and the wrist perfectly match the movement of the end tool.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
(A) ArtiSential® Bipolar Fenestrated Grasper, (B) ArtiSential® Needle Holder.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Suture task pad. The matching vertical dots are targets for up and down vertical sutures.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
(A) Setting for suture task with ArtiSential® instruments. (B) Robotic setting for suture task with da Vinci® surgical system.

References

    1. Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report--a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial) Ann Surg. 2010;251:417–420. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181cc8f6b.
    1. Fan G, Zhou Z, Zhang H, et al. Global scientific production of robotic surgery in medicine: A 20-year survey of research activities. Int J Surg. 2016;30:126–131. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.04.048.
    1. Close A, Robertson C, Rushton S, et al. Comparative cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy as alternatives to open radical prostatectomy for treatment of men with localised prostate cancer: a health technology assessment from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Eur Urol. 2013;64:361–369. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.02.040.
    1. Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, et al. Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016;263:103–109. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001249.
    1. Awtar S, Trutna TT, Nielsen JM, Abani R, Geiger J. FlexDex™: a minimally invasive surgical tool with enhanced dexterity and intuitive control. J Med Device. 2010;4:035003. doi: 10.1115/1.4002234.
    1. Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, et al. Long-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large-scale case-control and case-matched Korean multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:627–633. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.48.8551.
    1. Park DJ, Han SU, Hyung WJ, et al. Long-term outcomes after laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a large-scale multicenter retrospective study. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1548–1553. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-2065-7.
    1. Ly HH, Tanaka Y, Fukuda T, Sano A. Grasper having tactile sensing function using acoustic reflection for laparoscopic surgery. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2017;12:1333–1343. doi: 10.1007/s11548-017-1592-7.
    1. Lee C, Park WJ, Kim M, et al. Pneumatic-type surgical robot end-effector for laparoscopic surgical-operation-by-wire. Biomed Eng Online. 2014;13:130. doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-13-130.
    1. Sawada H, Egi H, Hattori M, et al. Stochastic resonance enhanced tactile feedback in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:3811–3818. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4124-y.
    1. Ottermo MV, Ovstedal M, Lango T, et al. The role of tactile feedback in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2006;16:390–400. doi: 10.1097/01.sle.0000213734.87956.24.
    1. Heijnsdijk EA, Pasdeloup A, van der Pijl AJ, Dankelman J, Gouma DJ. The influence of force feedback and visual feedback in grasping tissue laparoscopically. Surg Endosc. 2004;18:980–985. doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-9244-0.
    1. Alleblas CCJ, Vleugels MPH, Coppus S, Nieboer TE. The effects of laparoscopic graspers with enhanced haptic feedback on applied forces: a randomized comparison with conventional graspers. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:5411–5417. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5623-9.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir