Benchtop testing and comparisons among three types of through-the-scope endoscopic clipping devices

Sumanth R. Daram, Shou Jiang Tang, Ruonan Wu, S. D.Filip To

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Through-the-scope (TTS) endoscopic clipping devices are widely used. No benchtop testing or direct comparisons of these endoclips have been performed to show their rotational ability and inherent mechanical strengths during closure and after deployment. This study aimed to provide benchtop data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development. Methods: Benchtop testing and comparisons were performed for three groups of TTS clips: QuickClip2 long, resolution, and instinct clips. The main outcome measurements were device-in-endoscope retroflection angles (DIERA), opening strength, "snapping" force of acute clip closure, and neoprene pulling strength. Results: The achievable gastroscope DIERA was 10 for QuickClip2, 3 for the resolution clip, and 10 for the instinct clip. The QuickClip and the Instinct clip rotated almost equally well under all endoscope configurations, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). With or without a sheath, the resolution clip lacked the ability to rotate. During clip opening force testing (the amount of force required to force open the jaws of a deployed clip by 3.2 mm; 3.2 mm was chosen due to the standard dimension of the gauge used for the measurement), the Instinct clips were the strongest. For the Instinct clips, an opening force of 404 ± 124 g was needed to open the closed clip, and an additional 386 ± 133 g was required to open the clip jaws to 3.2 mm. In terms of snapping force during acute closure and neoprene pulling strength, the instinct and resolution clips performed almost equally. The limitations of the study were the benchtop testing and the finite sample size for closing and pulling strength comparisons. Conclusions: The QuickClip2 and the Instinct clip rotate equally well under different endoscope configurations. The resolution clips lack rotational ability. The instinct clips are stronger mechanically than the other two TTS clips. Stronger clips are perhaps associated with higher therapeutic efficacy and retention rates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1521-1529
Number of pages9
JournalSurgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques
Volume27
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2013

Fingerprint

Surgical Instruments
Equipment and Supplies
Instinct
Endoscopes
Aptitude
Neoprene
Jaw
Gastroscopes
Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography
Sample Size

Keywords

  • Benchtop testing
  • Clip
  • Clipping device
  • Device-in-endoscope retroflection angle
  • Endoclip
  • Endoscope
  • Endoscopy
  • Opening strength
  • Rotation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Benchtop testing and comparisons among three types of through-the-scope endoscopic clipping devices. / Daram, Sumanth R.; Tang, Shou Jiang; Wu, Ruonan; To, S. D.Filip.

In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, Vol. 27, No. 5, 01.05.2013, p. 1521-1529.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Daram, Sumanth R. ; Tang, Shou Jiang ; Wu, Ruonan ; To, S. D.Filip. / Benchtop testing and comparisons among three types of through-the-scope endoscopic clipping devices. In: Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques. 2013 ; Vol. 27, No. 5. pp. 1521-1529.
@article{e8d8209bb0b94258bcf9a3cd64f540d3,
title = "Benchtop testing and comparisons among three types of through-the-scope endoscopic clipping devices",
abstract = "Background: Through-the-scope (TTS) endoscopic clipping devices are widely used. No benchtop testing or direct comparisons of these endoclips have been performed to show their rotational ability and inherent mechanical strengths during closure and after deployment. This study aimed to provide benchtop data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development. Methods: Benchtop testing and comparisons were performed for three groups of TTS clips: QuickClip2 long, resolution, and instinct clips. The main outcome measurements were device-in-endoscope retroflection angles (DIERA), opening strength, {"}snapping{"} force of acute clip closure, and neoprene pulling strength. Results: The achievable gastroscope DIERA was 10 for QuickClip2, 3 for the resolution clip, and 10 for the instinct clip. The QuickClip and the Instinct clip rotated almost equally well under all endoscope configurations, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). With or without a sheath, the resolution clip lacked the ability to rotate. During clip opening force testing (the amount of force required to force open the jaws of a deployed clip by 3.2 mm; 3.2 mm was chosen due to the standard dimension of the gauge used for the measurement), the Instinct clips were the strongest. For the Instinct clips, an opening force of 404 ± 124 g was needed to open the closed clip, and an additional 386 ± 133 g was required to open the clip jaws to 3.2 mm. In terms of snapping force during acute closure and neoprene pulling strength, the instinct and resolution clips performed almost equally. The limitations of the study were the benchtop testing and the finite sample size for closing and pulling strength comparisons. Conclusions: The QuickClip2 and the Instinct clip rotate equally well under different endoscope configurations. The resolution clips lack rotational ability. The instinct clips are stronger mechanically than the other two TTS clips. Stronger clips are perhaps associated with higher therapeutic efficacy and retention rates.",
keywords = "Benchtop testing, Clip, Clipping device, Device-in-endoscope retroflection angle, Endoclip, Endoscope, Endoscopy, Opening strength, Rotation",
author = "Daram, {Sumanth R.} and Tang, {Shou Jiang} and Ruonan Wu and To, {S. D.Filip}",
year = "2013",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-012-2679-4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "1521--1529",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Benchtop testing and comparisons among three types of through-the-scope endoscopic clipping devices

AU - Daram, Sumanth R.

AU - Tang, Shou Jiang

AU - Wu, Ruonan

AU - To, S. D.Filip

PY - 2013/5/1

Y1 - 2013/5/1

N2 - Background: Through-the-scope (TTS) endoscopic clipping devices are widely used. No benchtop testing or direct comparisons of these endoclips have been performed to show their rotational ability and inherent mechanical strengths during closure and after deployment. This study aimed to provide benchtop data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development. Methods: Benchtop testing and comparisons were performed for three groups of TTS clips: QuickClip2 long, resolution, and instinct clips. The main outcome measurements were device-in-endoscope retroflection angles (DIERA), opening strength, "snapping" force of acute clip closure, and neoprene pulling strength. Results: The achievable gastroscope DIERA was 10 for QuickClip2, 3 for the resolution clip, and 10 for the instinct clip. The QuickClip and the Instinct clip rotated almost equally well under all endoscope configurations, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). With or without a sheath, the resolution clip lacked the ability to rotate. During clip opening force testing (the amount of force required to force open the jaws of a deployed clip by 3.2 mm; 3.2 mm was chosen due to the standard dimension of the gauge used for the measurement), the Instinct clips were the strongest. For the Instinct clips, an opening force of 404 ± 124 g was needed to open the closed clip, and an additional 386 ± 133 g was required to open the clip jaws to 3.2 mm. In terms of snapping force during acute closure and neoprene pulling strength, the instinct and resolution clips performed almost equally. The limitations of the study were the benchtop testing and the finite sample size for closing and pulling strength comparisons. Conclusions: The QuickClip2 and the Instinct clip rotate equally well under different endoscope configurations. The resolution clips lack rotational ability. The instinct clips are stronger mechanically than the other two TTS clips. Stronger clips are perhaps associated with higher therapeutic efficacy and retention rates.

AB - Background: Through-the-scope (TTS) endoscopic clipping devices are widely used. No benchtop testing or direct comparisons of these endoclips have been performed to show their rotational ability and inherent mechanical strengths during closure and after deployment. This study aimed to provide benchtop data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development. Methods: Benchtop testing and comparisons were performed for three groups of TTS clips: QuickClip2 long, resolution, and instinct clips. The main outcome measurements were device-in-endoscope retroflection angles (DIERA), opening strength, "snapping" force of acute clip closure, and neoprene pulling strength. Results: The achievable gastroscope DIERA was 10 for QuickClip2, 3 for the resolution clip, and 10 for the instinct clip. The QuickClip and the Instinct clip rotated almost equally well under all endoscope configurations, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). With or without a sheath, the resolution clip lacked the ability to rotate. During clip opening force testing (the amount of force required to force open the jaws of a deployed clip by 3.2 mm; 3.2 mm was chosen due to the standard dimension of the gauge used for the measurement), the Instinct clips were the strongest. For the Instinct clips, an opening force of 404 ± 124 g was needed to open the closed clip, and an additional 386 ± 133 g was required to open the clip jaws to 3.2 mm. In terms of snapping force during acute closure and neoprene pulling strength, the instinct and resolution clips performed almost equally. The limitations of the study were the benchtop testing and the finite sample size for closing and pulling strength comparisons. Conclusions: The QuickClip2 and the Instinct clip rotate equally well under different endoscope configurations. The resolution clips lack rotational ability. The instinct clips are stronger mechanically than the other two TTS clips. Stronger clips are perhaps associated with higher therapeutic efficacy and retention rates.

KW - Benchtop testing

KW - Clip

KW - Clipping device

KW - Device-in-endoscope retroflection angle

KW - Endoclip

KW - Endoscope

KW - Endoscopy

KW - Opening strength

KW - Rotation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876281438&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876281438&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-012-2679-4

DO - 10.1007/s00464-012-2679-4

M3 - Article

C2 - 23292554

AN - SCOPUS:84876281438

VL - 27

SP - 1521

EP - 1529

JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 5

ER -