The invention generally relates to surgical staplers and stapling.
An endocutter is a surgical tool that staples and cuts tissue to transect that tissue while leaving the cut ends hemostatic. An endocutter is small enough in diameter for use in minimally invasive surgery, where access to a surgical site is obtained through a trocar, port, or small incision in the body. A linear cutter is a larger version of an endocutter, and is used to transect portions of the gastrointestinal tract. A typical endocutter receives at its distal end a disposable single-use cartridge with several rows of staples, and includes an anvil opposed to the cartridge. During actuation of an endocutter, the cartridge fires all of the staples that it holds. In order to deploy more staples, the endocutter must be moved away from the surgical site and removed from the patient, after which the old cartridge is exchanged for a new cartridge. The endocutter is then reinserted into the patient. However, it can be difficult and/or time-consuming to locate the surgical site after reinsertion. Further, the process of removing the endocutter from the patient after each use, replacing the cartridge, and then finding the surgical site again is tedious, inconvenient and time-consuming, particularly where a surgical procedure requires multiple uses of the endocutter.
In order to overcome these difficulties, Cardica, Inc. of Redwood City, Calif. has developed a true multi-fire endocutter that is capable of firing multiple times without the need to utilize single-use disposable cartridges. That endocutter is described in, for example, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/263,171, filed on Oct. 31, 2008 (the “Endocutter Document”), which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. In order to accomplish such multiple firing, a feeder belt is used, to which a plurality of staples are attached. The staples are sheared from the feeder belt during firing of the endocutter. The feeder belt is long and thin. The feeder belt can extend through a shaft of the tool and into a stapler head that engages tissue.
The use of the same reference symbols in different figures indicates similar or identical items.
The Endocutter Document describes exemplary feeder belts used in a surgical stapler. In certain surgical applications, it may be advantageous to reduce the profile of the end effector of the surgical stapler. Further, where the surgical stapler is articulated, it may be simpler to advance the feeder belt to the end effector where the staples have not yet been created.
Referring to
The die 4 includes at least one contact surface 8. The contact surface 8 may be angled downward and outward, at least in part, and the angle of the contact surface 8 relative to the plane of the feeder belt 2 increases from the proximal to the distal direction. The wings 6 may be arranged on both lateral sides of the feeder belt 2, such that the wings 6 are arranged in two rows on opposite sides of the feeder belt 2. Alternately, the wings 6 are arranged differently on the feeder belt 2, or into one row or three or more rows. Advantageously, the die 4 provides a different contact surface 8 corresponding to each row of wings 6. Alternately, the contact surface 8 is not angled, but rather is curved at least in part.
The die 4 may be held in a substantially fixed position relative to the feeder belt 2, such as within the end effector of the surgical stapler. The feeder belt 2 may be advanced distally relative to the die 4, where that advancement may be performed such as set forth in the Endocutter Document. As the feeder belt 2 is moved distally, one or more wings 6 enter the die 4 and encounter an contact surface 8. For simplicity, such contact is described with respect to a single wing 6. As the feeder belt 2 advances distally, a wing 6 encounters the proximal end of a corresponding contact surface 8. The contact surface 8, at its proximal end, is angled or curved slightly out of plane relative to the wing 6, in such a manner that contact between the wing 6 and the contact surface 8 exerts a force on the wing 6 that bends the wing 6 slightly downward relative to the feeder belt 2 and relative to its previous position. As the wing 6 moves distally through the die, the contact surface 8 angles or curves to a progressively greater degree, such that the wing 6 continues to bend downward relative to the feeder belt 2 and the original orientation of the wing 6. Advantageously, the wing 6 bends at or in proximity to the end 12 of the wing 6 fixed to the feeder belt 2, and the wing 6 itself remains in substantially a single plane, where than plane angles away from the plane of the feeder belt 2 an increasing amount as the wing 6 moves distally. At the distal end of the contact surface 8, the angled or curved surface is angled substantially ninety degrees relative to the feeder belt 2, such that the wing 6 is oriented at substantially a ninety degree angle relative to the feeder belt 2. Alternately, the final angle of the wing 6 relative to the feeder belt 2 may be different than substantially ninety degrees. The wing 6 has been bent to a second angle relative to the feeder belt 2 that is different from the first angle that the wing 6 made with the feeder belt 2. At this point, the wing 6 has been transformed into a staple 14, and the staple 14 is pulled out of the distal end of the die 4 by the distal motion of the feeder belt 2. The staples 14 exiting the feeder belt 2 are unformed, and may be configured substantially as set forth in the Endocutter Document. The unformed staples 14 are configured for deployment into tissue, as set forth in the Endocutter Document. Each staple 14 is frangibly connected to the feeder belt 2 upon its exit from the die. Optionally, such frangibility may result from stress exerted on the end 12 of the staple 14 connected to the feeder belt 2. That is, the wings 6 optionally may be connected to the feeder belt 2 strongly enough that they are not frangibly connected to the feeder belt 2, and such that the weakening of the end 12 of the wing 6 connected to the feeder belt 2 by rotation of the wing 6 relative to the feeder belt 2 renders the unformed staple 14 frangible from the feeder belt 2.
As seen most clearly in
As a result of motion of the feeder belt 2 through the die 4, staples 14 are manufactured by the die 4. Where the die 4 is located in the end effector of the surgical stapler, the staples 14 are manufactured within the end effector, such that manufacture of the staples 14 may be performed within a patient while the end effector is adjacent to tissue of the patient, or otherwise located within a patient. The wings 6 are not staples, because they are not oriented in a fashion in which they can be deployed into tissue. The wings 6 must be bent and reoriented by the die 4 before they can be deployed into tissue of a patient.
Referring to
Referring also to
Optionally, the upper piece 16 and lower piece 20 may be moved to close the die 4 by closing the end effector of the surgical stapler, as set forth in the Endocutter Document. For example, the upper piece 16 may be held in the anvil of the surgical stapler, and the lower piece 20 may be held in the staple holder of the surgical stapler, such that closure of the end effector of the surgical stapler closes the die 4 and transforms the wings 6 within the die 4 into unformed staples 14.
While the invention has been described in detail, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that various changes and modifications can be made and equivalents employed, without departing from the present invention. It is to be understood that the invention is not limited to the details of construction, the arrangements of components, and/or the method set forth in the above description or illustrated in the drawings. Statements in the abstract of this document, and any summary statements in this document, are merely exemplary; they are not, and cannot be interpreted as, limiting the scope of the claims. Further, the figures are merely exemplary and not limiting. Topical headings and subheadings are for the convenience of the reader only. They should not and cannot be construed to have any substantive significance, meaning or interpretation, and should not and cannot be deemed to indicate that all of the information relating to any particular topic is to be found under or limited to any particular heading or subheading. Therefore, the invention is not to be restricted or limited except in accordance with the following claims and their legal equivalents.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2964751 | Lang | Dec 1960 | A |
3170279 | Dubini | Feb 1965 | A |
3581551 | Wilkinson | Jun 1971 | A |
3650453 | Smith, Jr. | Mar 1972 | A |
3899914 | Akiyama | Aug 1975 | A |
4043504 | Hueil et al. | Aug 1977 | A |
4086926 | Green et al. | May 1978 | A |
4206863 | Savino | Jun 1980 | A |
4228895 | Larkin | Oct 1980 | A |
4328918 | Yoshida | May 1982 | A |
4475679 | Fleury, Jr. | Oct 1984 | A |
4583276 | Olesen | Apr 1986 | A |
4619391 | Sharkany et al. | Oct 1986 | A |
4633861 | Chow et al. | Jan 1987 | A |
4669647 | Storace | Jun 1987 | A |
4762260 | Richards et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4969591 | Richards et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5156315 | Green et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5192288 | Thompson et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5413272 | Green et al. | May 1995 | A |
5476206 | Green | Dec 1995 | A |
5655698 | Yoon | Aug 1997 | A |
5662260 | Yoon | Sep 1997 | A |
5692668 | Schulze et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5810855 | Rayburn et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5816471 | Plyley et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5855311 | Hamblin et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5894979 | Powell | Apr 1999 | A |
5908149 | Welch et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5918791 | Sorrentino et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5964774 | McKean et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6086304 | Hujishima et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6306149 | Meade | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6391038 | Vargas et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
6602252 | Mollenauer | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6716232 | Vidal et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6817508 | Racenet | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6843403 | Whitman | Jan 2005 | B2 |
7025747 | Smith | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7097089 | Marczyk | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7140527 | Ehrenfels et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7168604 | Milliman et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7172104 | Scirica et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7179267 | Nolan et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7207471 | Heinrich et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7213736 | Wales et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7225963 | Scirica | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7225964 | Mastri et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7234624 | Gresham et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7238195 | Viola | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7510106 | Manabe | Mar 2009 | B2 |
20030120284 | Palacios et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030236551 | Peterson | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20050184121 | Heinrich | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20060011699 | Olson et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060041273 | Ortiz et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060151567 | Roy | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070027472 | Hiles et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070034668 | Holsten et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070073341 | Smith et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070083234 | Shelton, IV et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070118163 | Boudreaux et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070125828 | Rethy et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20080078807 | Hess et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1238634 | Sep 1994 | EP |
2005160933 | Jun 2005 | JP |
2080833 | Jun 1997 | RU |
WO-8101953 | Jul 1981 | WO |
WO-8501427 | Apr 1985 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Gong, Shao W., “Perfectly flexible mechanism and integrated mechanism system design”, Mechanism and Machine Theory 39 (2004), (Nov. 2004),1155-1174. |
Lim, Jonas J., et al., “A review of mechanism used in laparascopic surgical instruments”, Mechanism and Machine Theory 38, (2003),1133-1147. |
Lim, Jyue B., “Type Synthesis of a Complex Surgical Device”, Masters Thesis, (Feb. 21, 2001). |
Lim, Jonas J., et al., “Application of Type Synthesis Theory to the Redesign of a Complex Surgical Instrument”, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering (124), (Jun. 2004),265-272. |
Kolios, Efrossini et al., “Microlaparoscopy”, J. Endourology 18(9), (Nov. 2004),811-817. |
Steichen, Felicien M., et al., “Mechanical Sutures in Surgery”, Brit. J. Surg. 60(3), (Mar. 1973),191-197. |
“Cardica Microcutter Implant Delivery Device 510(k), Cover Sheet, Table 10.1, “Substantial Equivalence Comparison,” and Section 12, “Substantial Equivalence Discussion””. |