Article

The trade-off between flexibility and maneuverability: task performance with articulating laparoscopic instruments

Minimally Invasive Surgery Program, Legacy Health System, 1040 NW 22nd Avenue, Suite 560, Portland, OR 97210, USA.
Surgical Endoscopy (Impact Factor: 3.31). 04/2009; 23(12):2697-701. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-009-0462-y
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Laparoscopic instruments are rigid and thus cannot provide the degrees of freedom (DOF) needed by a surgeon in certain situations. A new generation of laparoscopic instruments with the ability to articulate their end effectors is available. Although these instruments offer the flexibility needed to perform complex tasks in a constricted surgical site, their control may be hampered by their increased complexity.
This study compared the task performance between articulating and conventional laparoscopic instruments. Surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience (8 experts) and staff with no surgical experience (8 novices) were recruited for the test. Both groups were required to perform three standardized tasks (peg transfer, left-to-right suturing, and up-and-down suturing) in a bench top model using conventional and articulating instruments. Performance was scored using a standardized 100-point scale based on movement speed and accuracy. After the initial trials with conventional and articulating instruments, each participant was given a short orientation on how to use the articulating instrument advantageously. The participant then was retested with the articulating instrument.
As expected, the expert group scored significantly better than the novice group (p < 0.001). The combined data from both groups showed better performance with the conventional instruments than with the articulating instruments (p = 0.074). The experts maintained their proficient laparoscopic performance using conventional instruments in their first attempts with the articulating instruments (91 vs. 84), whereas the novices had greater difficulty with the articulating instruments than with the conventional instruments (46 vs. 59). After a short orientation, however, the novices outscored the expert group in terms of net improvement in performance with the articulating instrument (27 vs. 1% improvement).
Experienced surgeons are readily able to transfer their skills from conventional to articulating laparoscopic instruments. To speed the learning process, the use of articulating instruments can be started at an early stage of surgical training.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Bin Zheng, Mar 31, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
117 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Controlling surgical task speed and maintaining accuracy are vital components of robotic surgical skills. This study was designed to investigate the relationship between accuracy and speed for robot-assisted surgical skills. Ten participants were asked to alternately touch two circular targets with various dimensions and distances between two targets, using the da Vinci Surgical System. The design of this study was based on Fitt's law. Statistical correlations between the index of difficulty (ID) and the movement time (MT), as well as the ID and the smoothness of the movement, were analysed. A significant linear correlation between MT and ID was shown. Speed was reduced to maintain accuracy as the level of task difficulty increased. There was no significant correlation between the smoothness of the movement and ID. The trade-off between speed and accuracy plays an important role in robot-assisted surgical proficiency.
    International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery 09/2010; 6(3):324-9. DOI:10.1002/rcs.336 · 1.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) is a potentially less invasive approach than standard laparoscopy (LAP). However, SILS™ may not allow the same level of manual dexterity and technical performance compared to LAP. We compared the performance of standardized tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program using either the LAP or the SILS™ technique. Medical students, surgical residents, and attending physicians were recruited and divided into inexperienced (IE), laparoscopy-experienced (LE), and SILS™-experienced (SE) groups. Each subject performed standardized tasks from FLS, including peg transfer, pattern cutting, placement of ligating loop, and intracorporeal suturing using a standard three-port FLS box-trainer with standard laparoscopic instruments. For SILS™, the subjects used an FLS box-trainer modified to accept a SILS Port™ with two working ports for instruments and one port for a 30° 5-mm laparoscope. SILS™ tasks were performed with instruments capable of unilateral articulation. SILS™ suturing was performed both with and without an articulating EndoStitch™ device. Task scores, including cumulative laparoscopic FLS score (LS) and cumulative SILS™ FLS score (SS), were calculated using standard time and accuracy metrics. There were 27 participants in the study. SS was inferior to LS in all groups. LS increased with experience level, but was similar between LE and SE groups. SS increased with experience level and was different among all groups. SILS™ suturing using the articulating suturing device was superior to the use of a modified needle driver technique. SILS™ is more technically challenging than standard laparoscopic surgery. Using currently available SILS™ platforms and instruments, even surgeons with SILS™ experience are unable to match their overall LAP performance. Specialized training curricula should be developed for inexperienced surgeons who wish to perform SILS™.
    Surgical Endoscopy 02/2011; 25(2):483-90. DOI:10.1007/s00464-010-1197-5 · 3.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) is potentially less invasive compared with standard laparoscopic surgery (LAP); however, it may be more technically challenging and have a longer learning curve. A two-phase study was conducted to examine the performance of standardized tasks on a surgical simulator by novices during a distributed training period. Phase 1 examined the effect of LAP-specific or SIL-specific training on skill acquisition for both techniques. Phase 2 compared the effectiveness and learning curves of additional instrument types for SIL (straight [STR] vs. dynamic articulating [D-ART]). Medical students without previous surgical experience were randomized to LAP-specific training or SIL-specific training, using static articulating instruments [S-ART] for SIL. LAP and SIL scores on the peg transfer (PEG) and pattern cutting (CIRCLE) tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) were measured at baseline and after four training sessions. In phase 2, a new group of subjects were randomized to SIL training using STR or D-ART instruments, with similar baseline and post-training testing. FLS task scores were calculated and compared according to training regimen and instrument type. Forty-five subjects completed the study. All scores improved significantly during the training period. Improvement in LAP score was similar between LAP-trained and SIL-trained groups. Improvement of SIL score was better for the SIL-trained group. Final scores were better and the learning curve was shorter for LAP versus SIL technique, with no differences in SIL scores according to instrument type. LAP technique results in superior task performance with a shorter learning curve compared with SIL technique during a standardized training period. SIL-specific simulator training is better than LAP training alone to improve SIL performance. Neither S-ART nor D-ART instruments for SIL are associated with improved performance or shorter learning curve compared with STR instruments.
    Surgical Endoscopy 06/2011; 25(12):3798-804. DOI:10.1007/s00464-011-1791-1 · 3.31 Impact Factor
Show more