Comparison of PMAT Camera Holder with Human Camera Holder

Abstract

Aim: During minimal access surgery an assistant is controlling thelaparoscope and surgeon should be free to manipulate instruments.Although the advantages of laparoscopic surgery are well documented,one disadvantage is that, for optimum performance, an experiencedcamera driver is required who can provide the necessary views for theoperating surgeon. There are many drawbacks in human cameraoperator especially if they are not trained. The self camera-control bythe surgeon gives more stability of the laparoscopic image. The aim ofthis study was to compare PMAT camera holder device with traditionalassistant-driven laparoscopic camera control.Materials and Methods: Laparoscopic Appendicectomy, OvarianCystectomy and Laparoscopic sterilization were performed. On 14patients, the operating surgeon used the �PMAT� and performed thesurgery without a laparoscopic camera assistant. On the other groupof 14 patients, an experienced camera operator was responsible forcontrol of the laparoscopic field of vision in the traditional manner.The time required for surgery was documented.Results: The mean operative times for PMAT and camera personassistedappendicectomy was 45 minutes and 40 minutes respectively.For ovarian cystectomy 45 and 50 minutes and for laparoscopicsterilization it was 15 and 10 minutes. There were no differences inoutcome of surgery or blood loss in the two groups. The operativesurgeon perceived some increase in shoulder and neck pain with use ofthe PMAT scope holder.Conclusions: This PMAT device provides a means for the operativesurgeon to safely perform simple laparoscopic procedures alone withoutsignificantly increasing operative time or morbidity.