Suture-TOOL : A suturing device for swift and standardized abdominal aponeurosis closure
(2022) In Surgery in Practice and Science 11.- Abstract
Introduction: Surgeons can reduce incisional hernia formation by adhering to standardized techniques for incisional wound closure. This is often neglected by the time a long operation is to be ended and can lead to the risk of developing an incisional hernia or a wound rupture. To address this issue, a suturing machine (Suture-TOOL) was developed for swift and standardized abdominal closure. The aim was to compare the user safety, speed, and suturing quality between Suture-TOOL and manual Needle-Driver suturing. Method: Fifteen surgeons who were specialists in surgery, urology, and gynaecology as well as surgical trainees were invited. The Suture-TOOL was presented to the surgeons who read the instructions for use before starting the... (More)
Introduction: Surgeons can reduce incisional hernia formation by adhering to standardized techniques for incisional wound closure. This is often neglected by the time a long operation is to be ended and can lead to the risk of developing an incisional hernia or a wound rupture. To address this issue, a suturing machine (Suture-TOOL) was developed for swift and standardized abdominal closure. The aim was to compare the user safety, speed, and suturing quality between Suture-TOOL and manual Needle-Driver suturing. Method: Fifteen surgeons who were specialists in surgery, urology, and gynaecology as well as surgical trainees were invited. The Suture-TOOL was presented to the surgeons who read the instructions for use before starting the test. Each surgeon closed nine 15 cm-long incisions in a human body model; six with Suture-TOOL and three with the Needle-Driver technique. Gloves were examined for puncture damage. Endpoints were suture-length/wound-length (SL/WL)-ratio, closure time, number of stitches, learning curve, and glove puncture rate. A VAS-evaluation concerning different Suture-Tool user impressions was completed. Results: A SL/WL-ratio ≥4 was 98% for Suture-TOOL versus 69% for Needle-Driver (p < 0.001). Suture time was shorter for Suture-TOOL (p < 0.001). Wound stitch count was higher for Needle-Driver (p = 0.013). The median SL/WL-ratio was similar between groups. The learning curve plateaued after three closures using Suture-TOOL. Two glove punctures were detected—all in the Needle-Driver group. Suture-TOOL received high VAS scores for all measured functionalities. Conclusion: Suture-TOOL is a promising device for clinical use. It is safe, easy, and fast resulting in a high-quality suture lines with a short learning curve and a high functionality ranking.
(Less)
- author
- Börner, Gabriel ; Edelhamre, Marcus LU ; Rogmark, Peder LU and Montgomery, Agneta LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2022
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Abdominal wall closure, Mechanical device, Standardization, Suture device, Suture technique, Wound closure technique
- in
- Surgery in Practice and Science
- volume
- 11
- article number
- 100137
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85164098290
- ISSN
- 2666-2620
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.sipas.2022.100137
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 89e9c554-5e0a-45a4-9fec-7da31c65aae4
- date added to LUP
- 2023-10-23 13:06:36
- date last changed
- 2023-10-24 11:58:43
@article{89e9c554-5e0a-45a4-9fec-7da31c65aae4, abstract = {{<p>Introduction: Surgeons can reduce incisional hernia formation by adhering to standardized techniques for incisional wound closure. This is often neglected by the time a long operation is to be ended and can lead to the risk of developing an incisional hernia or a wound rupture. To address this issue, a suturing machine (Suture-TOOL) was developed for swift and standardized abdominal closure. The aim was to compare the user safety, speed, and suturing quality between Suture-TOOL and manual Needle-Driver suturing. Method: Fifteen surgeons who were specialists in surgery, urology, and gynaecology as well as surgical trainees were invited. The Suture-TOOL was presented to the surgeons who read the instructions for use before starting the test. Each surgeon closed nine 15 cm-long incisions in a human body model; six with Suture-TOOL and three with the Needle-Driver technique. Gloves were examined for puncture damage. Endpoints were suture-length/wound-length (SL/WL)-ratio, closure time, number of stitches, learning curve, and glove puncture rate. A VAS-evaluation concerning different Suture-Tool user impressions was completed. Results: A SL/WL-ratio ≥4 was 98% for Suture-TOOL versus 69% for Needle-Driver (p < 0.001). Suture time was shorter for Suture-TOOL (p < 0.001). Wound stitch count was higher for Needle-Driver (p = 0.013). The median SL/WL-ratio was similar between groups. The learning curve plateaued after three closures using Suture-TOOL. Two glove punctures were detected—all in the Needle-Driver group. Suture-TOOL received high VAS scores for all measured functionalities. Conclusion: Suture-TOOL is a promising device for clinical use. It is safe, easy, and fast resulting in a high-quality suture lines with a short learning curve and a high functionality ranking.</p>}}, author = {{Börner, Gabriel and Edelhamre, Marcus and Rogmark, Peder and Montgomery, Agneta}}, issn = {{2666-2620}}, keywords = {{Abdominal wall closure; Mechanical device; Standardization; Suture device; Suture technique; Wound closure technique}}, language = {{eng}}, publisher = {{Elsevier}}, series = {{Surgery in Practice and Science}}, title = {{Suture-TOOL : A suturing device for swift and standardized abdominal aponeurosis closure}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sipas.2022.100137}}, doi = {{10.1016/j.sipas.2022.100137}}, volume = {{11}}, year = {{2022}}, }