Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “FORCEPS”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps in GI endoscopy: a cost-minimization analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of disposable biopsy forceps seems to be effective and safer than reusable biopsy forceps with respect to the risk of infection transmission. The results of cost analysis studies comparing reusable versus disposable biopsy forceps are conflicting. This study compared the cost of reusable versus disposable biopsy forceps. METHODS: A cost-minimization analysis was carried out from the viewpoint of a hospital. Direct costs were included. The study design was retrospective. For reusable biopsy forceps, the evaluation of costs included purchase prices, cleaning (chemicals, equipment, technician time), and a fee for sterilization in a centralized facility. The cost evaluation for disposable biopsy forceps included acquisition and destruction costs. Costs were expressed in United States dollars. RESULTS: The mean number of uses was approximately 90 per reusable forceps. The cost per use of reusable biopsy forceps was 6.84 US dollars (acquisition 3.59 US dollars, cleaning 2.28 US dollars, centralized sterilization fee 0.97 US dollars). The cost per use of disposable biopsy forceps varied from 10.72 US dollars to 15.63 US dollars. Additional cost per use of disposable biopsy forceps ranged from 3.88 US dollars to 8.79 US dollars. CONCLUSIONS: From a strictly economic point of view, the use of reusable biopsy forceps is advantageous. However, additional factors should be considered. It would be essential to take into account the potential risk of infectious disease transmission related to the use of both types of forceps, which remains uncharacterized.

Biopsy↗
PubMed2000

Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps for colorectal epithelial cell proliferation in humans.

The performance of various measures of rectal mucosal proliferation has been evaluated in the literature, but the performance of the forceps used to obtain the tissue has received little attention. We used data from two large studies of proliferation at a single institution to compare reusable and disposable endoscopic forceps. Endoscopic pinch biopsies were taken 10 cm from the anal verge using either reusable or disposable, oval-cupped, sheathed forceps. The specimens were fixed, embedded, and sectioned, taking care to orient the specimens longitudinally. Five sections were placed on each slide. We determined how many slides did not contain eight scorable crypts (inadequate) and how many sections were necessary to identify eight complete crypts. There were 395 subjects who had biopsies taken with reusable forceps and 185 subjects who had biopsies taken with disposable forceps. The specimens were inadequate in 27.6% of the reusable forceps specimens versus 2.7% of the disposable forceps (P < 0.0001). The mean number of tissue sections necessary to identify eight scorable crypts for the reusable forceps was 3.82 (SD, 0.87) compared with 3.17 (SD, 0.83) for disposable forceps (P = 0.0001). The specimens taken with the disposable forceps were better, probably because the forceps were sharper. We believe that the better quality of the specimens and the sterility justify the higher cost of disposable forceps. We would urge investigators in proliferation studies to evaluate the biopsy equipment as carefully as they evaluate other aspects of their methods.

Biopsy↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps. A prospective cost analysis in the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit of the Dijon University Hospital].

AIMS: The goal of this study was to compare the cost of a biopsy session performed with a disposable and a reusable endoscopic biopsy forceps. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Over a 10-month period, 15 new reusable forceps (10 gastric and 5 colonic) were prospectively tracked. A biopsy session performed with a reusable forceps included its current purchase price, the sterilization cost and the number of uses. A biopsy session performed with a disposable forceps was calculated with its current purchase price and its incineration cost. RESULTS: At the end of the study, only one reusable forceps had broken and the number of uses was 65. The cost of a biopsy session performed with a gastric reusable forceps was euro 7.52 (including euro 1.92 of sterilization cost) and euro 8.67 for a reusable colonic forceps (with the same sterilization cost). The cost of a biopsy session performed with a gastric or a colonic disposable forceps was euro 11.98. From 44 uses for a colonic forceps and 37 uses for a gastric one, a biopsy session performed with a reusable forceps was already cheaper. CONCLUSION: In this study, a biopsy session performed with a reusable forceps was less expensive than with a disposable one. However, the extra cost generated by the disposable forceps may be offset by an easier inventory control and the reduction of the cross contamination risk.

Biopsy↗
PubMed2004

Comparison of 23 gauge and 25 gauge anterior capsulotomy forceps.

In cataract surgery, the most commonly-used procedure for incision of the anterior capsule is continuous curvilinear capsulorrhexis (CCC), developed by Gimbel and Neuhann. As Gimbel has reported, CCC is a safe technique for phacoemulsification and aspiration (PEA) and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. The optimum incision method for CCC is thought to be that of using anterior capsulotomy forceps. Recently, I have developed the side-port 23 gauge anterior capsulotomy forceps (23G forceps), manufactured by Asico, which can be manipulated via a small incision, as well as the side-port 25 gauge anterior capsulotomy forceps (25G forceps) and 25/23 gauge tapered anterior capsulotomy forceps (tapered forceps), manufactured by Inami, which are thought to provide even better ease of handling. In view of the fact that the visibility, ease of handling, bending, adverse effect on the wound, and effect on the cornea of these various forceps are important, the present comparison study among these forceps was conducted on pig lenses by means of 0.1 % trypan blue staining of the anterior capsule. It was found that capsulorrhexis was difficult with the 25G forceps because of the strong bend of the shaft. However, the tapered forceps has little bend, and like the 23G forceps, it showed outstanding handling and visibility and had little adverse effect on the wound.

Animals↗
PubMed2004

Operative vaginal delivery: a comparison of forceps and vacuum for success rate and risk of rectal sphincter injury.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the success rate of operative vaginal delivery and risk of rectal sphincter injury when forceps or vacuum was used. STUDY DESIGN: Cases were identified by a retrospective review of delivery logbooks and an obstetric database. Rotations were excluded. Failure was defined as inability to deliver the fetus with the initial instrument. Rectal injury was defined as third- or fourth-degree laceration. Institutional review board approval was obtained. P-value of less than .05 was considered significant, and odds ratios (OR) were calculated when appropriate. RESULTS: Data were obtained for 1802 deliveries: 1438 occiput anterior and 364 occiput posterior positions. For occiput anterior position, rectal sphincter injury with forceps was 53.8% and vacuum 26.6% (P < .0001, OR 3.25). Failure rate with vacuum was 6.3% and forceps 0.9% (P < .0001, OR 7.53). For occiput posterior position, rectal injury with forceps was 71.6% and vacuum 33.1% (P < .0001; OR 5.25). Failure rate with vacuum was 33.0% and with forceps 13.6% (P < .0001, OR 3.15). For occiput posterior position, failure rate at mid position with vacuum was 71.4%, and forceps 16.7% (P < .001, OR 12.5). Failure rate at low position with vacuum was 30.8%, and forceps 12.5% (P < .001, OR 3.14). Failure rate with vacuum at mid position was higher than at low position (P < .0001, OR 5.57). Failure rate with forceps at mid and low positions was not significantly different. There was no difference in failure rate between vacuum and forceps at the outlet position. CONCLUSIONS: For both occiput anterior and posterior cases, the use of forceps was associated with a higher success rate than the vacuum, but with greater risk of rectal sphincter injury. The use of either vacuum or forceps from the occiput posterior position was associated with a higher likelihood of rectal injury and lower likelihood of vaginal delivery when compared with the occiput anterior position.

Anal Canal↗
PubMed2005

Soft forceps.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of maternal and fetal trauma and, chiefly, the fear of law suits, have contributed to a significant decline in rates of forceps-assisted deliveries and an increase in rates of cesarean sections, especially in the United States. Our experience with gas-sterilized forceps blades covered with a soft rubber coating--the "soft" forceps--is described. METHOD: Ninety-six women who required a forceps-assisted delivery for standard indications were randomly allocated to 2 groups. There were 51 women in the regular forceps group and 45 women in the soft forceps group. Low forceps delivery with a Simpson instrument was used in all cases. The groups were compared for fetal injury. RESULTS: The rates of severe facial abrasion and minimal marking were 4.1% and 61%, respectively, in the regular forceps group and 1.9% and 34% in the soft forceps group. CONCLUSION: The soft forceps may reduce the rates of neonatal facial abrasion and skin bruises. The forceps should be further perfected, as well as vacuum extractors; they should both continue to be part of the obstetrician's armamentarium.

Contusions↗
PubMed2002

Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes between vacuum extraction and forceps deliveries.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the instrumental deliveries carried out at the Armed Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during the year 2000 and compare the outcome of ventouse and forceps deliveries. METHODS: A retrospective case note review of all instrumental deliveries, carried out at the Armed Forces Hospital, Riyadh, during the year 2000. RESULTS: Three hundred and four vaginal deliveries, of whom 258 were ventouse and 46 were forceps deliveries, were assisted. Seventy percent of forceps deliveries were carried out in primigravida as compared to 49% of ventouse deliveries. Fetal distress was the indication in 81.4% of ventouse deliveries as compared to 76% of forceps deliveries. Prolonged 2nd stage of labor was an indication in 11% of forceps and 2.3% of ventouse deliveries. Consultants and Senior Registrars were more likely to use forceps while registrars use ventouse as their preferred instrument for delivery. Attempted ventouse delivery was successful in 91.4% as compared to 95.7% in forceps. Extension of an episiotomy was more likely to occur with ventouse than forceps deliveries while 3rd degree perineal tear occurred more with forceps deliveries. Babies who had attempted ventouse deliveries have lower apgar score at one minute than attempted forceps. No babies required admission to neonatal intensive care unit. There was only one stillbirth in the ventouse delivery group due to intrapartum asphyxia and true knot in the umbilical cord. CONCLUSION: Forceps is more likely to be used in the primigravida and prolonged 2nd stage of labor and less likely to fail. Ventouse is more likely to be used by registrars. Extension of an episiotomy and low apgar score at one minute is more likely to occur with ventouse deliveries.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Contamination of single-use biopsy forceps: a prospective in vitro analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that single-use biopsy forceps prevent interpatient transmission of infection during endoscopy. Passage of sterile forceps through the accessory channel of the endoscope may lead to contamination, however, if the endoscope has been inadequately processed. The potential for contamination of single-use biopsy forceps at various stages of endoscope reprocessing was prospectively evaluated. METHODS: A total of 50 disposable biopsy forceps were passed through the accessory channels of 10 colonoscopes at the following stages of reprocessing: (1) before use in patients to establish a baseline of high-level disinfection, (2) directly after colonoscopy to confirm contamination with use, (3) after manual cleaning and flushing of the accessory channel to support the claim that manual cleaning significantly decreases bioburden, (4) after manual cleaning and a 2-minute soak in 2% glutaraldehyde to assess for contamination after an inadequate cleaning time, and (5) after manual cleaning and a 20-minute soak in 2% glutaraldehyde. The forceps were then sealed in sterile plastic bags after adding 20 mL of thioglycollate broth medium. The suspension was passed through a 0.2-micron vacuum filter and the filters were cultured. All cultures were incubated more than 48 hours. RESULTS: Biopsy forceps underwent a total of 50 aerobic and 50 anaerobic cultures. Colony-forming units too numerous to count of GI flora, including Escherichia coli, Klebsiella, Pseudomonas, and Clostridium species, grew on 19 of 20 culture plates from biopsy forceps passed through colonoscopes immediately after use. One plate in this group grew 3 colony-forming units of E coli. Persistence of GI flora was noted on 5 of 20 plates after manual cleaning of the colonoscopes. No GI flora were found on forceps after the colonoscopes after soaking in gluteraldehyde for 2 and 20 minutes. Environmental contaminants including diptheroids, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus species grew on 16 culture plates. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Single-use biopsy forceps are highly susceptible to contamination during passage through the accessory channels of improperly cleaned endoscopes. (2) Disinfection of the colonoscopes in this study prevented contamination of the forceps at baseline and after reprocessing. (3) Proper endoscope reprocessing may be the most important factor in preventing biopsy forceps-related interpatient infection.

Bacteria↗
PubMed2003

A prospective comparison of performance of biopsy forceps used in single passage with multiple bites during upper endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: A single biopsy is usually obtained for each passage of a biopsy forceps. It was hypothesized that multiple bites per passage might improve the quantity and quality of tissue obtained, without significant artifacts. This hypothesis was tested in a prospective, pathologist-blinded study using different forceps. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty consecutive patients who underwent elective upper endoscopy were included. Five different forceps were used in six different ways, varying in the number of bites taken per passage. Two pathologists, who were blinded to the type of biopsy forceps used, evaluated the specimens according to the parameters of maximum weight (mg), size of largest fragment (mm), depth, squash artifact, adequacy, and overall rating. RESULTS: A total of 240 biopsy specimens were obtained. The Microvasive Multibite and Megabite forceps obtained specimens with the maximum weight (P<0.05) and the largest size (P<0.05), respectively. Alligator forceps were able to obtain specimens significantly larger in size than the oval-shaped forceps (P<0.05). The Olympus FB-24K forceps performed best in both the adequacy score and the overall rating score (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Forceps with a needle, or the Multibite forceps, allow more biopsies to be taken per passage and improve the quality of tissues obtained. "Needleless" forceps can be used to obtain two samples per passage through the endoscope that are as good as when only one sample is collected. This approach can save time, and causes no significant damage to the biopsy specimens.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Reusable biopsy forceps: a prospective evaluation of cleaning, function, adequacy of tissue specimen, and durability.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have indicated that reusable biopsy forceps remain contaminated after reprocessing and can only be used a mean of 12 to 25 times without malfunction. Because this contradicts traditional endoscopic practice, our study investigated the ability to sterilize a type of commercially available biopsy forceps and prospectively evaluated their function in vivo until malfunction and/or breakage. METHODS: Thirty reusable biopsy forceps were studied, 15 of which were contaminated for 5 trials each with 10(6) Bacillus stearothermophilus, and 15 of which were prospectively evaluated clinically over an 18-month period (9/98-3/00). Contaminated forceps were reprocessed by using a standard protocol and placed in a sterile bag containing soy broth. The latter was passed through a 0.2 micron filter and was subsequently cultured. In vivo data included biopsy site, size, adequacy, problems obtaining a biopsy specimen, and reasons for ultimate forceps failure. RESULTS: After contamination, all biopsy forceps yielded a heavy growth of B stearothermophilus. No forceps, including 5 that were piecemeal dismantled with a wire cutter, had residual bacteria after reprocessing. In the in vivo study, 1507 biopsy sessions were undertaken in 1339 procedures. Forceps were categorized as new or like-new in 1259 of 1339 (94%) procedures, some loss of function but usable in 72 of 1339 (5.4%), and inadequate function or broken at use in 8 of 1339 (0.6%). Histologically, 1501 specimen sets were adequate (99.6%) and mean specimen size was 2.7 +/- 0.1 mm. Mechanical problems were noted in only 38 of 1507 (3%) sessions to include such things as sticky forceps, and the mean number of uses to malfunction or breakage was 91 +/- 15 (SEM) (range 19-132). CONCLUSIONS: This reusable biopsy forceps can be sterilized and used a mean of 91 times with adequate tissue sampling. Mechanical problems were minor to time of breakage. Contingent on acquisition and reprocessing costs as well as the number of procedures performed, this reusable forceps has the potential for significant cost savings.

Biopsy, Needle↗
PubMed2006

Manual methods are suboptimal compared with automated methods for cleaning of single-use biopsy forceps.

OBJECTIVE: Most reusable biopsy forceps and all of the currently available single-use biopsy forceps do not have a port that allows fluid flow down the inner tubular shaft of the device. Reusable biopsy forceps are widely used and reprocessed in healthcare facilities, and single-use biopsy forceps are reprocessed either in-house (eg, in Canada and Japan) or by third-party reprocessors (eg, in the United States). The objective of this study was to determine the cleaning efficacy of automated narrow-lumen sonic irrigation cleaning, sonication-only cleaning, and manual cleaning for biopsy forceps. DESIGN: A simulated-use study was performed by inoculating the inner channel of single-use biopsy forceps with artificial test soil containing both Enterococcus faecalis and Geobacillus stearothermophilus at concentrations of 10(6) colony-forming units per milliliter. The cleaning methods evaluated were manual cleaning, sonication-only cleaning, and "retroflush" cleaning by an automated narrow-lumen irrigator. Bioburden and organic soil reduction after washing was evaluated. Forceps used in biopsies of patients were also tested to determine the worst-case soiling levels. RESULTS: Only retroflush irrigation cleaning could effectively remove material from within the shaft portion of the biopsy forceps: it achieved an average reduction of more than 95% in levels of protein, hemoglobin, carbohydrate, and endotoxin. However, even this method of cleaning was not totally effective, as only a 2 log10 reduction in bioburden could be achieved, and there were low residual levels of hemoglobin and carbohydrate. CONCLUSION: The data from this evaluation indicate that manual and sonication-only cleaning methods for biopsy forceps were totally ineffective in removing material from within the biopsy forceps. Even the use of retroflush cleaning was not totally effective. These findings suggest that in-hospital reprocessing of biopsy forceps with currently available equipment and cleaning methods is suboptimal.

Automation↗
PubMed1993

The effect of forceps size on the adequacy of specimens obtained by transbronchial biopsy.

This study prospectively compared the diagnostic yield of transbronchial biopsies using large and small forceps (cup sizes, 3 x 2 x 0.9 versus 2 x 1.5 x 0.6 mm, respectively). Diagnostic yield was compared by a pathologist, blinded to the size of forceps used on the basis of the relative amount of tissue obtained, alveolar tissue obtained, and ability to ascertain a histopathologic diagnosis. Large forceps obtained significantly more tissue than did small forceps (20 of 27 patients [74%] versus five of 27 patients [19%], p < 0.005, with similar amounts obtained in two patients). Also, large forceps obtained significantly more alveolar tissue than did small forceps (16 of 22 patients [73%] versus six of 22 patients [27%], p < 0.05, with no alveolar tissue obtained in five patients). In 18 of the 27 patients, biopsies performed resulted in nonspecific diagnoses, including fibrosis or chronic inflammation. All nine of the patients with a specific diagnosis were ultimately proved to have sarcoidosis. There was a trend toward more of these patients having noncaseating granulomas obtained with the large forceps than with the small forceps (seven of nine patients versus four of nine patients). No difference was observed in the amount of postbiopsy bleeding with either forceps. We conclude that large forceps used for transbronchial biopsy yield more tissue and more alveolar tissue than do small forceps. These findings may have an impact on the diagnostic yield in some diseases such as sarcoidosis.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Rotational versus nonrotational forceps: maternal and neonatal outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to evaluate maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with rotations performed with Leff forceps in comparison with nonrotational forceps deliveries. STUDY DESIGN: A review of 267 rotational and nonrotational forceps deliveries from August 1996 through February 1998 was performed. Multiple maternal and neonatal outcome measures were compared and results were analyzed by chi(2) with the Fisher exact test and the Student t test. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-three traditional low-forceps or outlet forceps deliveries were compared with 104 rotational forceps deliveries performed with Leff forceps. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in maternal age, gestational age, gravidity, parity, total labor duration, birth weight, and Apgar scores. There were significantly lower rates of episiotomy, third- and fourth-degree lacerations, and sulcus lacerations in the rotation group, and the second stage of labor was also shorter. The neonatal intensive care unit admission rate was higher in the rotation group; however, none of the admissions were directly related to the mode of delivery. CONCLUSION: Rotational deliveries performed with Leff forceps are associated with less maternal morbidity and shorter second stage of labor than are deliveries performed with traditional forceps. Leff forceps are a safe option for rotation of the persistent occipitoposterior fetal position.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Teaching the Laufe-Piper forceps technique at cesarean delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To present a method of teaching forceps technique during cesarean delivery of breech-presenting infants using Laufe-Piper forceps and to evaluate its usefulness. STUDY DESIGN: For several years, residents at the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, have learned and practiced Piper forceps technique during cesarean delivery. To assess their experience with this method, we mailed questionnaires to third- and fourth-year residents and recent graduates of the Galveston program. The same surveys were mailed to a control group of residents and recent graduates of two other programs where this teaching exercise is not practiced routinely. RESULTS: Responses were received from 32 (74%) study subjects and 63 (71%) controls. Demographic characteristics and experience with vaginal breech delivery were similar between the two groups. Respondents from the Galveston program noted greater annual use of forceps for vaginal delivery of cephalic-presenting infants (P = .012). They also rated themselves as more comfortable (P = .023) and more skilled (P = .006) with Piper forceps than controls. Of 53 respondents who had had previous experience with this teaching method, 47 noted that it provided a great or moderate educational benefit, and 36 strongly or moderately believed it gave them more confidence in using Piper forceps during vaginal breech delivery. Using multiple regression analysis, sex, overall level of experience, Piper forceps experience during vaginal delivery and overall forceps use were stronger determinants of self-rated comfort and skill than was experience with Laufe-Piper forceps during cesarean. CONCLUSION: Laufe-Piper forceps can be used for cesarean delivery of breech-presenting infants. This practice promotes confidence and skill for their use at vaginal delivery.

Breech Presentation↗
PubMed2004

Performance of bipolar forceps during coagulation and its dependence on the tip material: a quantitative experimental assay. Technical note.

The aim of this study was to measure objectively the adherence of burned tissue to bipolar forceps to evaluate the coagulation performance of forceps made of different types of metals. Coagulation performance of bipolar forceps made of gold, titanium, and stainless steel was determined by comparing the amount of protein in the adhered coagulum on the tips. The amount of adhered coagulum was significantly less on the gold-plated bipolar forceps than on those made of the other two materials. The ease with which coagulum could be removed was compared using the cleaning cycle of an ultrasonic rinsing device. This ease of removal was also significant with the gold-plated forceps. Electron microscopy observations of the surface of the forceps tips revealed a significant difference in roughness among these materials, and there were also significant differences in wetting tensions. Measuring adherence based on three different types of roughness and wetting tensions of forceps made from the same metal (titanium) also demonstrated a significant difference in the cleaning cycle. Histological examination of an artery coagulated with the gold-plated bipolar forceps showed that the structure had been completely collapsed without destruction of the layers, whereas arteries coagulated with the other materials revealed severely damaged structures. Adherence to bipolar forceps was dependent on both the material in the tips and the roughness of this material. The gold-plated bipolar forceps demonstrated the best performance.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

[New forceps for thoracoscopic needle biopsy].

INTRODUCTION: When the diagnosis cannot be established preoperatively but malignant lung tumor is suspected, we frequently perform thoracoscopic wedge resection in order to perform rapid histodiagnosis on the specimen. If the diagnosis is malignancy, we extend the surgery to lobectomy for complete resection in many cases. However, cartridges of linear endoscopic staplers used for wedge resection are useless in such cases. This economic loss is expensive. Thoracoscopic needle biopsy is economic, but the technique is difficult and there is a risk of damage to important blood vessels when the needle penetrates deeper than is needed. Therefore, we developed forceps for thoracoscopic needle biopsy. METHOD: We changed the tip shape of endoscopic grasping forceps, fixed a guide for inserting a biopsy needle and prevented the biopsy needle from going through the grasping extension for safety. We made 3 types of forceps, small, middle, and large sized forceps that could adapt the various sizes of tumors. RESULT: We used the small forceps for 23 cases: the middle forceps for 13 cases; the large forceps for 7 cases; for a total of 43 cases, and succeeded in diagnosing 35 cases. The reason for failure in 6 cases using the small forceps was the exceeding softness of the lesion in 1 case, failure of rapid histodiagnosis in 1 case, and mal-adaptation between the forceps and tumor size in the remaining cases. The reason for failure in 2 cases using middle forceps was failure of rapid histodiagnosis in both cases. There was no complication due to biopsy. All bleeding after the puncture was quickly stopped. There was no dissemination or recurrence in the thoracic lumen. CONCLUSION: During surgery for palpable visible lung tumors with an uncertain histological diagnosis, thoracoscopic needle biopsy is very easy and economic. It is also useful for avoiding unnecessary lung lobectomy, and is a minimally invasive method, contributing to medical economy.

Biopsy, Needle↗
PubMed1985

Survey of obstetric forceps training in North America in 1981.

In April, 1983, a questionnaire was sent to all 144 United States and Canadian members of the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics to survey residency training and current use of obstetric forceps in 1981. One hundred five programs (73%), responsible for at least 283,000 births in 1981, were subsequently analyzed. All training programs used outlet forceps and all programs but one used midforceps for delivery. Hospitals with high cesarean birth rates did not perform significantly fewer midforceps operations. Hospitals with high midforceps rates did not also have high outlet forceps rates nor did these high rates closely reflect the personal attitude to obstetric forceps of the director of the obstetric training program. Simpson's forceps were most commonly used for outlet forceps and occipitoanterior midforceps operations, whereas Kielland's forceps were selected by 76% of programs for rotational midcavity deliveries. Staff obstetricians were the primary instructors of forceps technique in the delivery room in only 50% of United States programs; all Canadian respondents reported the staff obstetrician as the principal educator in obstetric residency forceps training.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2004

Immediate maternal and neonatal effects of forceps and vacuum-assisted deliveries.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the differences in immediate maternal and neonatal effects of forceps and vacuum-assisted deliveries. METHODS: We conducted a medical record review of all forceps and vacuum-assisted deliveries that occurred from January 1, 1998, to August 30, 1999, at Winthrop-University Hospital. Maternal demographics and delivery characteristics were recorded. Maternal outcomes, such as use of episiotomy and presence of lacerations, were studied. Neonatal outcomes evaluated were Apgar scores, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, cephalohematomas, instrument marks and bruising, and caput and molding. RESULTS: Of 508 operative vaginal deliveries, 200 were forceps and 308 were vacuum assisted. Forceps were used more often than vacuum for prolonged second stage of labor (P =.001). There was a higher rate of epidural (P =.02) and pudendal (P <.001) anesthesia, episiotomies (P =.01), maternal third- and fourth-degree perineal (P <.001) and vaginal lacerations (P =.004) with the use of forceps, whereas periurethral lacerations were more common in vacuum-assisted (P =.026) deliveries. More instrument marks and bruising (P <.001) were found in the neonates delivered by forceps, whereas there was a greater incidence of cephalohematomas (P =.03) and caput and molding (P <.001) in the neonates delivered with vacuum. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that forceps use was associated with an increase in major perineal and vaginal tears (odds ratio [OR] 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27, 2.69; P =.001), an increase in instrument marks and bruising (OR 4.63; 95% CI 2.90, 7.41; P <.001) and a decrease in cephalohematomas (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.29, 0.83; P =.007) compared with the vacuum. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal injuries are more common with the use of forceps. Neonates delivered with forceps have more facial injuries, whereas neonates delivered with vacuum have more cephalohematomas. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-3

Adult↗