Learning curve estimation and insertion depth in Veress needle insertion using a conventional Veress needle and the VeressPlus™ needle

Journal Article (2025)
Author(s)

T. Horeman (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

Roelf Postema (Amsterdam UMC)

David Cefai (ProVinci Medtech)

Sem Frederik Hardon (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology, Amsterdam UMC)

Predrag Andrejevic (University of Malta)

J. Dankelman (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

J. Calleja-Agius (University of Malta)

Christian Camenzuli (University of Malta)

Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-12273-4
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Background: The Veress Needle (VN) is commonly used in establishing pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgery. However, severe vascular and/or visceral complications can occur due to overshoot at the insertion of the VN in the abdominal cavity. In order to investigate whether the new VeressPLUS needle (VN+) could improve safety, the learning curve of this needle was compared to that of a conventional VN, under standardized conditions. Methods: In total, 26 residents and med students, without prior Veress needle experience, were recruited and randomly assigned to VN or the VN+ group. A learning curve plateau phase recognition model was developed and used to determine the learning curve of the participants who used either the VN or the VN+ needle on two Thiel-embalmed human cadavers. Insertion of the needles was done in a systematic way in the upper abdomen and insertion depth was measured under direct laparoscopic vision. At the end of the learning curve, the number of participants that reached a safe insertion depth between 5 and 15 mm was compared. Results: On average, it took the VN group 8 trials to reach and establish the plateau phase of the learning curve. The VN+ group showed no learning curve at all. At the 8th trial, a significant difference (p < 0.002) in average insertion depth was found in favor of the VN+ (mean: 5.4 mm SD 1.4) compared to the VN (mean: 12.7 mm SD 6). In the VN group and VN+ group, 46% versus 8% exceeded the safe insertion depth of 10 mm at the end of the learning curve. Conclusion: This study indicates that for novices, there is no learning curve for the VN+, when compared to VN. Moreover, in all cases, the insertion depths were significantly reduced (with more than 50%) while using the VN+ when compared to the VN.