Project description:BackgroundMotorized articulating laparoscopic instruments (ALI) offer more degrees of freedom than conventional laparoscopic instruments (CLI). However, a difficult learning curve and complex instrument handling are still a problem of ALI. We compared the performance of new prototypes of motorized ALI with CLI in a series of standardized laparoscopic tasks performed by laparoscopic novices. Further, usability of the new ALI was assessed.MethodsA randomized cross-over study with 50 laparoscopic novices who either started with CLI and then changed to ALI (CA) or vice versa (AC) was conducted. All participants performed the European training in basic laparoscopic urological skills (E-BLUS) with each instrument in given order. Time and errors were measured for each exercise. Instrument usability was assessed.ResultsOverall, using CLI was significantly faster (CLI 4:27 min vs. ALI 4:50 min; p-value 0.005) and associated with fewer exercise failures in needle guidance (CLI 0 vs. ALI 12; p-value 0.0005) than ALI. Median amount of errors was similar for both instruments. Instrument sequence did not matter, as CA and AC showed comparable completion times. Regarding the learning effect, participants were significantly faster in the second attempt of exercises than in the first. In the needle guidance task, participants using CLI last demonstrated a significant speed improvement, whereas ALI were significantly slower in the second run. Regarding usability, CLI were preferred over ALI due to lighter weight and easier handling. Nevertheless, participants valued ALI's additional degrees of freedom.ConclusionUsing new motorized ALI in the E-BLUS examination by laparoscopic novices led to a worse performance compared to CLI. An explanation could be that participants felt overwhelmed by ALI and that ALI have an own distinct learning curve. As participants valued ALI's additional degrees of freedom, however, a future application of ALI could be for training purposes, ideally in combination with CLI.
Project description:Advancements in minimally invasive surgery has led to the development of several surgical instruments, including the ArtiSential®. This new instrument provides a greater range of motion and improved dexterity to laparoscopic procedures, making it an alternative option to traditional straight instruments, and the Da Vinci robot system. The purpose of this study is to compare the postoperative outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy using articulating instruments with those of a historical cohort of patients who underwent the same procedure using straight instruments. The study was designed as a prospective observational cohort study matched to a retrospective historical cohort using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the rate of early complications within 90 days of surgery. Other outcomes included the operation time, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus, time to first soft fluid diet, hospital stay, and mortality. After propensity score matching, 41 patients were enrolled in both groups. The mean age was 62.4 ± 12.3 years in the conventional group and 63.5 ± 9.6 years in the artisential group (p = 0.647). Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the artisential group compared to the conventional group (136.1 min vs. 163.9 min, p = 0.032). The time to first soft fluid diet was also significantly shorter in the artisential group (2.2 days vs. 2.8 days, p = 0.030), but there was no significant difference in the time to first flatus and overall hospital stay. The incidence of early complications was lower in the artisential group, but the difference was not significant (24.4% vs 7.3%, p = 0.070). There was no mortality in either group. The use of articulating instruments for laparoscopic gastrectomy did not increase postoperative morbidity compared to straight laparoscopic instruments. The use of articulating instruments may be associated with faster bowel recovery and less early complications.
Project description:PurposeWe evaluated the performance of a new multi-degree-of-freedom articulating laparoscopic instrument, ArtiSential, and compared it with that of a straight-shaped instrument and the da Vinci surgical system, in renal surgery using porcine model.Materials and methodsNine female Yorkshire pigs were equally divided into three groups. The three groups were compared at each surgical step in terms of objective and subjective parameters.ResultsThe median operative times for renal pedicle clamping and ureter dissection were significantly shorter in ArtiSential group than robotic group (1.3 min vs. 4.7 min, p=0.002; 8.1 min vs. 11.1 min, p=0.015). The median operative time for bladder repair was significantly longer in ArtiSential group than robotic and straight-shaped groups (17.9 min vs. 5.5 min, p=0.002; 17.9 min vs. 9.3 min, p=0.026). There were no significant differences among groups in terms of blood loss or intraoperative complications. ArtiSential device was less useable for renorrhaphy (p=0.009) and bladder repair (p=0.002) compared to the robotic system. ArtiSential group was less accurate than robotic group in terms of tumor resection, renorrhaphy, and bladder repair. During ureter dissection, bladder cuff excision, and bladder repair, the surgeon experienced greater wrist discomfort but lesser back discomfort in ArtiSential group than robotic group.ConclusionsFor most steps, ArtiSential performed as well as robotic and straight-shaped instruments. The development of specialized surgical techniques for ArtiSential will maximize the advantages of these instruments.
Project description:PurposeConventional straight-shaped laparoscopic surgical instruments have limitations that, unlike robotic surgery, the wrist joint cannot be used. This study aimed to analyze the short-term safety and feasibility of ArtiSential (Livsmed), a new articulating laparoscopic instrument, which obviates the limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery and allows the wrist joint to be used freely over 360° as in robotic surgery.MethodsThe study included patients who underwent conventional laparoscopy or laparoscopy with the ArtiSential instrument. Patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy for primary gastric adenocarcinoma in our institution were retrospectively reviewed. The groups were propensity score matched in a 11 ratio. Primary endpoint was incidence of early postoperative complication (postoperative 30-day morbidity and mortality) and secondary endpoints were operative outcomes.ResultsA total of 327 patients (147 of the conventional group and 180 of the ArtiSential group) were propensity score matched. After propensity score matching was performed, each group comprised of 122 patients. Both groups were comparable with regard to operation time, estimated blood loss, number of retrieved lymph nodes, and length of hospital stay. The ArtiSential group had a faster time to a fluid diet (2.6 ± 1.3 days vs. 2.3 ± 0.6 days, p = 0.015). There was no statistically significant difference in early postoperative complications between the two groups (the conventional group, 23.0%; the ArtiSential group, 26.2%; p = 0.656).ConclusionThe current study showed that the use of ArtiSential is a safe and feasible option without increasing operation time, length of hospital stay, and intraoperative bleeding.
Project description:Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision is the preferred approach for treating transverse colon cancer. Due to the anatomical complexity, mobilization and resection of the transverse colon can be technically challenging. This video demonstrates laparoscopic transverse colectomy using an articulating laparoscopic instrument for a 76-year-old female patient diagnosed with T-colon cancer.
Project description:BackgroundThe notion of articulation in surgery has been largely synonymous with robotics. The ARTISENTIAL® instruments aim at bringing advanced articulation to laparoscopy to overcome challenges in narrow anatomical spaces. In this paper, we present first single-center results of a series of low anterior resections, performed with ARTISENTIAL®.MethodsBetween September 2020 and August 2021, at the Department of Surgery, St. Marienkrankenhaus Siegen, Siegen, Germany, patients with cancer of the mid- and low rectum were prospectively enrolled in a pilot feasibility study to evaluate the ARTISENTIAL® articulated instruments in performing a laparoscopic low anterior resection. Perioperative and short-term postoperative data were analyzed.ResultsSeventeen patients (10 males/7 females) were enrolled in this study. The patients had a median age of 66 years (range 47-80 years) and a median body mass index of 28 kg/m2 (range 23-33 kg/m2). The median time to rectal transection was 155 min (range 118-280 min) and the median total operative time was 276 min (range 192-458 min). The median estimated blood loss was 30 ml (range 5-70 ml) and there were no conversions to laparotomy. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 15 (range 12-28). Total mesorectal excision (TME) quality was 'good' in all patients with no cases of circumferential resection margin involvement (R0 = 100%). The median length of stay was 9 days (range 7-14 days). There were no anastomotic leaks and the overall complication rate was 17.6%. There was one unrelated readmission with no mortality.ConclusionsLow anterior resection with ARTISENTIAL® is feasible and safe. All patients had a successful TME procedure with a good oncological outcome. We will now seek to evaluate the benefits of ARTISENTIAL® in comparison with standard laparoscopic instruments through a larger study.
Project description:A primary goal of training is the development of one's own procedure by self-learning, which can be facilitated by laparoscopic surgery owing to its recordable system. This video demonstrates laparoscopic low anterior resection for a 56-year-old male diagnosed with synchronous S-colon cancer and rectal cancer. The surgery was performed by a second-year fellow in the colorectal division under supervision.
Project description:Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy has been developed in two tracts of robotic and laparoscopic surgeries. Laparoscopic approach remains a frequently performed surgical method that accounts for a significant portion of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy. However, biliary and pancreatic reconstruction stages are still demanding procedures because of the inherent limitations of conventional laparoscopic instruments. Therefore, recently developed articulating laparoscopic instruments have greater dexterity similar to robotic instruments seem to be able to compensate for the weak points of conventional laparoscopic instruments. In this article, we demonstrate the hepaticojejunostomy and duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy technique using the new articulating laparoscopic instrument.
Project description:Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with central vessel ligation has been widely accepted for its oncological benefits in colon cancer surgery. However, laparoscopic right hemicolectomy involves a risk for vascular injury during dissection around the surgical trunk. This technical difficulty has been attributed to the limited movement of conventional laparoscopic forceps. Although robotic devices can overcome the restricted motion of laparoscopic devices, they are not yet widely used. The ArtiSential is an articulating laparoscopic instrument that has a two-joint end-effector that enables a wide range of motion precisely reflecting the surgeon's finger movements, and is designed to compensate for the drawbacks of conventional laparoscopic tools. The present study demonstrated the utility of articulating instruments in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy by comparing the authors' laparoscopic procedures, using articulating instruments, with robotic procedures. Articulating laparoscopic instruments can be successfully maneuvered in virtually the same manner as robotic devices and, as such, represent a viable alternative to robotic surgery.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13691-024-00654-w.