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.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. We examined the impact of tool complexity on surgeons' performance and evaluated the value of using a simulation-based program for reducing training cost. Methods. Three pairs of surgical graspers with increasing mechanical complexity, which were designed for open, laparoscopic, and endoscopic procedures, were used in performing a simple object transportation task. Task times and mental workload of 17 surgeons were compared using all 3 variations of the graspers to test the impact of tool complexity on surgical performance. Subsequently, 4 of these surgeons decided to enter a 3-week training phase and practiced with these 3 surgical instruments on a daily basis. Learning curves were plotted to examine the value of using simulation for proficiency training with these tools. Results. Task time was significantly prolonged as tool complexity increased. Practice in a simulated environment shortened the task time significantly and moderately reduced mental workloads. However, the difference in task time varied among the 3 types of tools. Between days 1 and 9, task times for each types of grasper were reduced by 55% (endoscopic), 42% (open), and 22% (laparoscopic). Conclusions. Tool complexity may degrade a surgeon's performance. Extensive simulation training programs are important for surgeons to gain proficiency in handling a tool before they practice on patients.
    Surgical Innovation 05/2014; 21(6). DOI:10.1177/1553350614532533 · 1.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Performing laparoscopic procedures requires different skill sets and team dynamics compared with open procedures. We evaluated team composition and procedure time between these two surgical approaches using data collected from hospitals in the United State and Canada.
    Surgical Endoscopy 11/2014; DOI:10.1007/s00464-014-3938-3 · 3.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper introduces the smart tissue anastomosis robot (STAR). Currently, the STAR is a proof-of-concept for a vision-guided robotic system featuring an actuated laparoscopic suturing tool capable of executing running sutures from image-based commands. The STAR tool is designed around a commercially available laparoscopic suturing tool that is attached to a custom-made motor stage and the STAR supervisory control architecture that enables a surgeon to select and track incisions and the placement of stitches. The STAR supervisory-control interface provides two modes: A manual mode that enables a surgeon to specify the placement of each stitch and an automatic mode that automatically computes equally-spaced stitches based on an incision contour. Our experiments on planar phantoms demonstrate that the STAR in either mode is more accurate, up to four times more consistent and five times faster than surgeons using state-of-the-art robotic surgical system, four times faster than surgeons using manual Endo360 $^circ$$^textregistered$ , and nine times faster than surgeons using manual laparoscopic tools.
    IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 04/2014; 61(4):1305-1317. DOI:10.1109/TBME.2014.2302385 · 2.23 Impact Factor


Available from
May 27, 2014