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

Area of Science:

• Minimally Invasive Surgery
• Surgical Techniques
• Laparoscopic Procedures

Background:

• Secure laparoscopic port-site closure is crucial for preventing complications like infection and hernia, especially for larger ports (≥10 mm).
• Conventional hand suturing for fascial closure can be challenging and time-consuming, particularly in deep port sites or thick abdominal walls.
• The Mochi needle offers a reusable instrument designed for controlled fascial approximation during laparoscopic procedures.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the Mochi needle technique with conventional hand suturing for laparoscopic port-site closure.
• To evaluate differences in operative efficiency, technical feasibility, and short-term postoperative outcomes between the two methods.

Main Methods:

• A prospective comparative study included 100 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery with port sites ≥10 mm.
• Patients were randomized into two groups: Mochi needle closure (Group A) and conventional hand suturing (Group B).
• Primary outcome was fascial closure time; secondary outcomes included procedure ease, wound complications, needle passes, and need for assistance.

Main Results:

• Mean fascial closure time was significantly shorter with the Mochi needle (2.6 min) versus conventional suturing (5.3 min) (p<0.001).
• The Mochi needle group reported higher ease-of-procedure scores (4.5 vs. 3.7; p=0.002) and required fewer needle passes (2.1 vs. 4.3; p<0.001).
• Less intraoperative assistance was needed for the Mochi needle group (4% vs. 18%; p=0.02), with no significant difference in short-term wound complications.

Conclusions:

• The Mochi needle technique enhances operative efficiency, reduces needle passes, and minimizes the need for additional assistance for laparoscopic port-site closure.
• Short-term wound outcomes are comparable between the Mochi needle and conventional suturing methods.
• Further multicenter studies are needed to assess long-term outcomes, including trocar-site hernia rates and overall clinical effectiveness.