Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2025
A comparative study on trocar configurations and the use of steerable instruments in totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia surgery training.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early-phase laparoscopic skill acquisition in veterinary students: impact of 2D/3D vision and conventional/articulating instruments.Irish veterinary journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTotally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia surgery is a commonly performed but technically challenging procedure with a long learning curve. As TEP can be executed using two different trocar placements: a midline or a triangular configuration, the question remains which one is technically easier to master.
methodsIn a multicenter crossover-study, medical students were randomised into two groups and executed tasks on a box trainer that measured time, volume and force parameters. Additionally, the study assessed whether the SATA instrument, a steerable laparoscopic instrument that articulates the instrument's tip, would reduce the difficulty of performing the tasks in the midline configuration. After training, all participants executed a first experiment using both trocar configurations, followed by a second experiment executed with steerable and non-steerable instruments in the midline configuration. Subjective and objective performances per condition and learning curves were assessed.
resultsParticipants were faster and showed lower peak forces in the triangulated configuration. Learning curve analysis showed a positive improvement in time and path length in the midline configuration. Although participants rated ergonomics and intuitiveness similarly between the instruments, they found the task easier with the SATA instruments, ranking the added value of the steering function as 5 out of 5. Objectively, time and path length showed no significant differences while exerted forces were lower when using conventional instruments.
conclusionAlthough the midline configuration is preferred in terms of comfort and posture, the findings indicate that, for inexperienced practitioners, performing TEP surgery in midline configuration is both subjectively and objectively more challenging, highlighting the need for extensive training to overcome its difficulties and possibly shorten its learning curve. Although instruments with additional steering functions were preferred over conventional instruments in the more challenging midline configuration, additional steering complexity did not result in better parameter outcomes, showing the need for more extensive training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.