OBJECTIVE: Intracorporeal suturing and knot tying can complicate, prolong or preclude minimally invasive surgical procedures, reducing their advantages over conventional approaches. An automated knot-tying device has been developed to speed suture fixation during minimally invasive cardiac surgery while retaining the desirable characteristics of conventional hand-tied surgeon's knots: holding strength and visual and haptic feedback. A rotating slotted disc (at the instrument's distal end) automates overhand throws, thereby eliminating the need to manually pass one suture end through a loop in the opposing end. The electronic actuation of this disc produces left or right overhand knots as desired by the operator. METHODS: To evaluate the effectiveness of this technology, seven surgeons with varying laparoscopic experience tied knots within a simulated minimally invasive setting, using both the automated knot-tying tool and conventional laparoscopic tools. Suture types were 2/0 braided and 4/0 monofilament. RESULTS: Mean knot-tying times were 246+/-116 s and 102+/-46 s for conventional and automated methods, respectively, showing an average 56% reduction in time per surgeon (p=0.003, paired t-test). The peak holding strength of each knot (the force required to break the suture or loosen the knot) was measured using tensile-testing equipment. These peak holding strengths were normalised by the ultimate tensile strength of each suture type (57.5 N and 22.1N for 2/0 braided and 4/0 monofilament, respectively). Mean normalised holding strengths for all knots were 68.2% and 71.8% of ultimate tensile strength for conventional and automated methods, respectively (p=0.914, paired t-test). CONCLUSIONS: Experimental data reveal that the automated suturing device has great potential for advancing minimally invasive surgery: it significantly reduced knot-tying times while providing equivalent or greater holding strength than conventionally tied knots. Published by Elsevier B.V.
OBJECTIVE: Intracorporeal suturing and knot tying can complicate, prolong or preclude minimally invasive surgical procedures, reducing their advantages over conventional approaches. An automated knot-tying device has been developed to speed suture fixation during minimally invasive cardiac surgery while retaining the desirable characteristics of conventional hand-tied surgeon's knots: holding strength and visual and haptic feedback. A rotating slotted disc (at the instrument's distal end) automates overhand throws, thereby eliminating the need to manually pass one suture end through a loop in the opposing end. The electronic actuation of this disc produces left or right overhand knots as desired by the operator. METHODS: To evaluate the effectiveness of this technology, seven surgeons with varying laparoscopic experience tied knots within a simulated minimally invasive setting, using both the automated knot-tying tool and conventional laparoscopic tools. Suture types were 2/0 braided and 4/0 monofilament. RESULTS: Mean knot-tying times were 246+/-116 s and 102+/-46 s for conventional and automated methods, respectively, showing an average 56% reduction in time per surgeon (p=0.003, paired t-test). The peak holding strength of each knot (the force required to break the suture or loosen the knot) was measured using tensile-testing equipment. These peak holding strengths were normalised by the ultimate tensile strength of each suture type (57.5 N and 22.1N for 2/0 braided and 4/0 monofilament, respectively). Mean normalised holding strengths for all knots were 68.2% and 71.8% of ultimate tensile strength for conventional and automated methods, respectively (p=0.914, paired t-test). CONCLUSIONS: Experimental data reveal that the automated suturing device has great potential for advancing minimally invasive surgery: it significantly reduced knot-tying times while providing equivalent or greater holding strength than conventionally tied knots. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Authors: Selami Dogan; Tayfun Aybek; Petar S Risteski; Farooq Detho; Andrea Rapp; Gerhard Wimmer-Greinecker; Anton Moritz Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Clifton C Reade; Curtis E Bower; B Marcus Bailey; David M Maziarz; Saqib Masroor; Alan P Kypson; L Wiley Nifong; W Randolph Chitwood Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: G W Roach; M Kanchuger; C M Mangano; M Newman; N Nussmeier; R Wolman; A Aggarwal; K Marschall; S H Graham; C Ley Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-12-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Peter H Lin; Ruth L Bush; Jonathan C Nelson; Russell Lam; Ramesh Paladugu; Changyi Chen; Gene Quinn; Alan B Lumsden Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Richard C Cook; L Wiley Nifong; Jacob E Enterkin; Patrick J Charland; Clifton C Reade; Alan P Kypson; Saqib Masroor; W Randolph Chitwood Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Martin T R Grapow; Miroslawa Mytsyk; Jens Fassl; Patrick Etter; Peter Matt; Friedrich S Eckstein; Oliver T Reuthebuch Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 1.637