Slip and damage properties of jaws of laparoscopic graspers

  • E. A. M. Heijnsdijk
  • H. de Visser
  • J. Dankelman
  • D. J. Gouma
Original article

Abstract

Background

The optimal jaws of laparoscopic graspers can be used to manipulate the tissue properly with minimal damage. The criteria jaws should satisfy are investigated.

Methods

The cecum of pigs was clamped between 13 pairs of jaws differing in size and profile. Various pinch and pull forces were applied. At 5 N pull force, the minimally required pinch force to prevent slip and the pinch force that is maximally allowable without causing damage were obtained.

Results

With increasing size of the jaws, the contact area with the tissue increases. With increasing contact area, the pinch force leading to tissue damage was increased from 15 to 37 N. A profile of the jaws decreased the pinch force needed to prevent slip of tissue from 22 to 3 N.

Conclusion

An optimal jaw possesses a large contact area to prevent tissue damage and a slight profile to prevent tissue slip.

Keywords

Laparoscopic instruments Tissue damage Forces 

References

  1. 1.
    Cartmill, JA, Shakeshaft, AJ, Walsh, WR, Martin, CJ 1999High pressures are generated at the tip of laparoscopic graspers.Aust NZ J Surg69127130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frank, T, Willetts, GJ, Carter, F, Cuschieri, A 1995Clamping the small intestine during surgery: predicted and measured sealing forces.Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]209111115Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heijnsdijk, EAM, Dankelman, J, Gouma, DJ 2002Effectiveness of grasping and duration of clamping using laparoscopic graspers.Surg Endosc1613291331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heijnsdijk, EAM, Voort, M, Visser, H, Dankelman, J, Gouma, DJ 2003Inter- and intra-individual variabilities of perforation forces of human and pig bowel tissue.Surg Endosc1719231926CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johansson, L, Norrby, K, Nyström, P-O, Lennquist, S 1984Intestinal intramural haemorrhage from abdominal missile trauma—clinical classification and prognosis.Acta Chir Scand1505156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marucci, DD, Cartmill, JA, Walsh, WR, Martin, CJ 2000Patterns of failure at the instrument–tissue interface.J Surg Res931620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Riegler, M, Sedivy, R, Sogukoglu, T, Cosentini, E, Bischof, G, Teleky, B, Feil, W, Schiessel, R, Hamilton, G, Wenzl, E 1996Epidermal growth factor promotes rapid response to epithelial injury in rabbit duodenum in vitro.Gastroenterology1112836PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Visser, H (2003) Grasping safely: instruments for bowel manipulation investigated (dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands. ISBN 90-407-2421-0Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Visser, H, Heijnsdijk, EAM, Herder, JL, Pistecky, PV 2002Forces and displacements in colon surgery.Surg Endosc1614261430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. A. M. Heijnsdijk
    • 1
    • 2
  • H. de Visser
    • 1
  • J. Dankelman
    • 1
  • D. J. Gouma
    • 2
  1. 1.Man–Machine Systems Group, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Marine TechnologyDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, Academic Medical CenterUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations