Safety and Efficiency of an Articulating Needle Driver in Advanced Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery

Literature Review of Handheld Articulating Instruments in Minimally Invasive Surgery

Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) using handheld articulating instruments (HAIs) has emerged as an innovative approach, offering enhanced dexterity and accessibility compared with conventional straight tools. There has been a significant surge in market interest surrounding HAIs. However, the question about the potential benefits of these devices for surgeons and patients in clinical applications remains unclear. Methods: We thoroughly searched relevant literature about the HAIs with clinical applications. This article reviews the feasibility, safety, outcomes, ergonomics, and learning curve associated with utilizing HAIs, including notable commercial products FlexDex, ArtiSential, and HandX. This study also investigates the comparisons of the use of HAIs with traditional laparoscopy and the da Vinci robotic system in terms of surgical outcomes and operational efficiency. Results: Early clinical studies demonstrate the applicability of HAIs across gastrointestinal, urologic, cardiothoracic, and general surgery, with promising results and few complications reported. Comparisons with conventional laparoscopy reveal no significant differences in surgical outcomes. However, HAIs present a more prolonged learning curve than robotic surgery for novice users. Combining three-dimensional visualization techniques facilitate performance. Further research with larger sample sizes is warranted to establish definitive superiority in surgical efficiency and characterize optimal training methodology. Conclusions: Overall, the maneuverability and lower cost of HAIs present new possibilities in MIS, potentially expanding accessibility for smaller health care organizations and benefiting more patients.

Can a Fully Articulating Electromechanical Laparoscopic Needle Driver Compare with a Robotic Platform in Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair?

Background: Enhanced laparoscopic instruments are filling the gap between straight-stick laparoscopic equipment and robotic platforms. We sought to evaluate the performance and cost of the HandX™ device during mesh fixation and peritoneal flap closure of transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repairs. Methods: The video recordings of a consecutive series of TAPP surgeries using the articulated needle driver device were compared with a series of surgeries on the DaVinci robotic platform by a single surgeon. Two critical steps of the procedure were analyzed: mesh fixation and peritoneal closure. A cost analysis between the two platforms was completed. Results: We analyzed 27 cases using the new needle driver and 27 cases using the DaVinci Surgical Robotic system. To evaluate the learning curve (LC) with the HandX device, we created three groups (G1, G2, and G3). The two latter groups were combined and called after LC. Mean fixation time using the DaVinci system was 258.1 seconds (±100.4) compared with 391.5 (±95.9) using the articulating handheld laparoscopic needle driver after LC (P < .001). The average time for peritoneal closure was 418.6 (±192.1) seconds for DaVinci and 634.5 (±159.5) seconds for HandX (P < .001). When comparing the after-LC HandX cases and the DaVinci system stratified by side, there was no significant difference in peritoneal closure in the right side (520.1 seconds (84.3) with the HandX versus 444.2 seconds (229.7) using the DaVinci system (P = .353). When evaluating direct cost of the instruments, HandX cases had a lower cost (310 USD) when compared with the cost of using DaVinci (973 USD). Conclusions: The new smart articulating needle driver may be a cost-effective means of bringing some of the benefits of the robotic platform to laparoscopy.