Comparison of Mochi Needle and Conventional Hand Suturing for Laparoscopic Port Closure: A Prospective Comparative Study.

Background Secure laparoscopic port-site closure is essential to prevent postoperative complications such as wound infection, wound dehiscence, and trocar-site hernia, particularly at port sites measuring 10 mm or more. Conventional hand suturing remains the standard technique for fascial closure; however, it may be technically demanding and time-consuming, especially in patients with deep port sites or increased abdominal wall thickness. The Mochi needle is a reusable fascial closure instrument designed to facilitate controlled fascial approximation during laparoscopic port-site closure. This study aimed to compare Mochi needle closure and conventional hand suturing with respect to operative efficiency, technical feasibility, and short-term postoperative outcomes. Methods This prospective comparative study was conducted in the Department of General Surgery at R.L. Jalappa Hospital and Research Centre, Kolar, Karnataka, India, from March 2026 to May 2026, after obtaining Institutional Ethics Committee approval. A total of 100 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic procedures requiring closure of port sites measuring 10 mm or more were included. Patients were allocated into two groups of 50 each using an odd-even allocation method based on serial patient enrollment numbers. Group A underwent port-site closure using the Mochi needle technique, whereas Group B underwent conventional hand suturing using a standard round-body needle. The primary outcome measure was fascial closure time. Secondary outcomes included ease of procedure assessed using a five-point Likert scale, wound-related complications within seven postoperative days, the number of needle passes required for closure, and the need for additional intraoperative assistance during port-site closure. Results The mean fascial closure time was significantly shorter in the Mochi needle group compared to the conventional suturing group (2.6 ± 0.6 minutes vs. 5.3 ± 0.8 minutes; t = -19.10, p<0.001). Ease-of-procedure scores were significantly higher in the Mochi needle group (4.5 ± 0.5 vs. 3.7 ± 0.7; t = 6.58, p=0.002). The Mochi needle group also required fewer needle passes (2.1 ± 0.5 vs. 4.3 ± 0.9; p<0.001) and less additional intraoperative assistance during closure (4% vs. 18%; p=0.02). Wound-related complications were infrequent in both groups, with no statistically significant difference observed between the two techniques during the seven-day follow-up period. Conclusion The Mochi needle technique demonstrated significantly improved operative efficiency, fewer needle passes, and reduced requirement for additional assistance compared with conventional hand suturing for laparoscopic port-site closure. Short-term wound outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Further multicenter studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are required to evaluate long-term outcomes, including trocar-site hernia incidence and overall clinical effectiveness.