Learning Intracorporeal Suture on Pelvitrainer Using a Robotized Versus Conventional Needle Holder.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is the gold standard approach in numerous surgical procedures. A new generation of robotized instruments has been developed to compensate for the ergonomic constraints of conventional instruments. The main objective was to compare the learning curves of novices for intracorporeal suturing on a laparoscopy pelvitrainer, using either a robotized needle holder or conventional needle holders. The post-training performances under ergonomically difficult conditions were also analyzed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifth-year medical students were randomized in group A using a robotized needle holder (JAIMY; Endocontrol, Grenoble, France) and group B using straight conventional needle holders. They undertook four training sessions (intracorporeal knot-tying task) followed by an evaluation session (intracorporeal knots-tying task, frontal suture, and hexagonal suture).

RESULTS

Twenty participants were included. The performances of the two groups (n = 10) were not significantly different at baseline. During the training sessions, there was a learning curve with a plateau at the third session for both the groups. At the final evaluation session, there was no significant difference between group A and group B for the intracorporeal knot-tying task (median fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery score: 468 versus 474.5 respectively; P = 0.762). There was a significant difference between group A and group B for the frontal suture (median global score: 15.75 versus 3.75 respectively; P = 0.005) but not for the hexagonal suture (median global score: 18 versus 15 respectively; P = 0.284).

CONCLUSIONS

Learning curves were equally fast using the robotized needle holder versus conventional instruments and led to equivalent performances. Under ergonomically difficult conditions, the robotized needle holder provided an advantage relative to conventional instruments.