Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Oct;74(5):1749-1754.
doi: 10.1007/s13304-022-01258-w. Epub 2022 Apr 13.

Safe implementation of hand held steerable laparoscopic instruments: a survey among EAES surgeons

S F Hardon  1   2 , A M Rahimi  3 , R R Postema  3   4 , E Willuth  5 , Y Mintz  6   7 , A Arezzo  8   7 , J Dankelman  4 , F Nickel  5   7 , T Horeman  4   7 ; EAES Technology Committee Study Group
Collaborators, Affiliations

Safe implementation of hand held steerable laparoscopic instruments: a survey among EAES surgeons

S F Hardon et al. Updates Surg. 2022 Oct.

Abstract

The complexity of handheld steerable laparoscopic instruments (SLI) may impair the learning curve compared to conventional instruments when first utilized. This study aimed to provide the current state of interest in the use of SLI, the current use of these in daily practice and the type of training which is conducted before using SLI in the operating room (OR) on real patients. An online survey was distributed by European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) Executive Office to all active members, between January 4th and February 3rd, 2020. The survey consisted of 14 questions regarding the usage and training of steerable laparoscopic instruments. A total of 83 members responded, coming from 33 different countries. Twenty three percent of the respondents using SLI, were using the instruments routinely and of these 21% had not received any formal training in advance of using the instruments in real patients. Of all responding EAES members, 41% considered the instruments to potentially compromise patient safety due to their complexity, learning curve and the inexperience of the surgeons. The respondents reported the three most important aspects of a possible steerable laparoscopic instruments training curriculum to be: hands-on training, safe tissue handling and suturing practice. Finally, a major part of the respondents consider force/pressure feedback data to be of significant importance for implementation of training and assessment of safe laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Training and assessment of skills regarding safe implementation of steerable laparoscopic instruments is lacking. The respondents stressed the need for specific hands-on training during which feedback and assessment of skills should be guaranteed before operating on real patients.

Keywords: Laparoscopy; Patient safety; Robot-assisted surgery; Steerable instruments; Survey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Drs. Sem Hardon, Masie Rahimi, Roelf Postema, Estelle Willuth, Yoav Mintz, Alberto Arezzo and Prof. Jenny Dankelman have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. Felix Nickel reports receiving travel support for conference participation as well as equipment provided for laparoscopic surgery courses by Karl Storz, Johnson & Johnson, Intuitive Surgical, Cambridge Medical Robotics, and Medtronic. Dr. ir. Tim Horeman is founder and shareholder of the TU-Delft MedTech startup Medishield Delft BV.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Percentage of respondents interested in steerable instruments
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Amount of times the steerable laparoscopic instruments were used on patients by the respondents using SLI
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Most commonly reported SLI
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Percentage of members which had received prior training
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Types of received training before using the instrument without supervision in the OR on patients. Combination of options are possible
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lane T. A short history of robotic surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018;100:5–7. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.supp1.5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. George EI, Brand TC, LaPorta A, Marescaux J, Satava RM. Origins of robotic surgery: from skepticism to standard of care. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg. 2018 doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2018.00039. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chopra S, Srivastava A, Tewari A. Robotic radical prostatectomy: the new gold standard, Arab. J Urol. 2012;10:23–31. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2011.12.005. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stafford AT, Walsh RM. Robotic surgery of the pancreas: the current state of the art. J Surg Oncol. 2015;112:289–294. doi: 10.1002/jso.23952. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shay SG, Chrin JD, Wang MB, Mendelsohn AH. Initial and long-term retention of robotic technical skills in an otolaryngology residency program. Laryngoscope. 2019;129:1380–1385. doi: 10.1002/lary.27425. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources