Influence of direction of view, target-to-endoscope distance and manipulation angle on endoscopic knot tying

British Journal of Surgery

Volumn 84, Issue 10, 1997, Pages 1460-1464

  Hanna, G B ^a   Shimi, S ^a   Cuschieri, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENDOSCOPE; ILLUMINATION; INSTRUMENT; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGEON; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ENDOSCOPY; HUMANS; NEEDLES; SUTURE TECHNIQUES;

EID: 0030750441     PISSN: 00071323     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800841033     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Hopkins HH. Optical principle of the endoscope. In: Berci G, ed. Endoscopy. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1976: 3-26.
2. Berci G, Kont LA. A new optical system in endoscopy with special reference to cystoscopy. Br J Urol 1969; 41: 564-71.
3. Berci G. Instrument I: rigid endoscope. In: Berci G, ed. Endoscopy. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1976: 74-112.
4. Kont LA, Berci G. A comparative assessment of optical and fibre gastroscopes. Medical and Biological Illustration 1967; 17: 181-90.
5. Knyrim K, Seidlitz HK, Hagenmuller F, Classen M. Color performance of video endoscopes: quantitative measurement of color reproduction. Endoscopy 1987; 19: 233-6.
6. Knyrim K, Seidlitz HK, Hagenmuller F, Classen M. Videoendoscopes in comparison with fiberscopes: quantitative measurement of optical resolution. Endoscopy 1987; 19: 156-9.
7. Eden CG, Ison KT, Popert RJ, Carter PG, Copteoat MJ. A consumer's guide to laparoscopic equipment for urology. Br J Urol 1993; 72: 1-5.
8. Satava R, Roe W, Joyce G. Current generation video endoscopes: a critical evaluation. Am Surg 1988; 54: 73-7.
9. Hanna GB, Frank TG, Cuschieri A. Objective assessment of endoscopic knot quality. Am J Surg (in press).