Learning curve estimation and insertion depth in Veress needle insertion using a conventional Veress needle and the VeressPlus™ needle
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)
More Info
expand_more
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.