The Data

Lost sharps is a
growing issue.

Exposed needle transfer in robotic surgery is a patient safety risk, a source of inefficiency, and a hindrance to surgeon autonomy.

Our Solution >

91% of surgeons reported 1 – 5 incidents of lost sharps in a 1-year period1

More than 80% of lost needles occur during the retrieval of the needle from the trocar2

One near-miss sharps (NMS) event takes between 21-70 minutes, and may require X-ray to resolve1

Additional medical care due to an RSI is estimated to be $70,000-$200,000 per patient3

Robotic Surgery is rapidly growing with a 10-year CAGR of 15.7%4

An RSI is a never event, and those due to hard foreign bodies (e.g., surgical sharps) have increased over the past decade3

“I’m the chairman of robotics, so I get the calls when there is a lost needle. I know firsthand that it happens, and it happens more than we think”
“With so much turnover, I never know who my tech will be or if they can handle passing needles without dropping one.”
“StitchKit allows me to focus on my patient and the case without worrying about taking needles in and out. It has improved the efficiency and safety of my cases”
Dr Brandon Chen
“StichKit makes needle exchanges safer and faster. It results in a minimum of 3 fewer instrument and needle exchanges during gastric bypass, saving time and completely eliminating the risk of losing a needle.”
Dr Jacob Hopping

Current methods of exposed needle transfer force trade-offs between safety and efficiency.

StitchKit Maximizes surgeon autonomy by optimizing both safety and efficiency

Literature and clinical experience support the value of StitchKit

Learn More >

Proven

In a published study in 422 patients, no hernias, infections, or AEs were reported. In addition, the authors reported that they were able to eliminate a port and reduced their reliance on skilled bedside assistants.

Learn More >

  1. Weprin, S.A., Meyer, D., Li, R. et al. Incidence and OR team awareness of “near-miss” and retained surgical sharps: a national survey on United States operating rooms. Patient Saf Surg 15, 14 (2021). 
  2. Medina, L.G., Martin, O., Cacciamani, G.E. et al. Needle lost in minimally invasive surgery: management proposal and literature review. J Robotic Surg 12, 391–395 (2018). 
  3. Weprin S, Crocerossa F, Meyer D, Maddra K, Valancy D, Osardu R, Kang HS, Moore RH, Carbonara U, J Kim F, Autorino R. Risk factors and preventive strategies for unintentionally retained surgical sharps: a systematic review. Patient Saf Surg. 2021 Jul 12;15(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s13037-021-00297-3. PMID: 34253246; PMCID: PMC8276389. 
  4. https://www.medicaldevice-network.com/analyst-comment/robotic-surgical-systems-market-displaying-continued-growth/ 
  5. Das D, Squires N, Mueller M, Collins S, Lewicky-Gaupp C, Bretschneider CE, Geynisman-Tan J, Kenton K. Suture-Needle Management Device and Novel Port Configuration for Robotic Sacrocolpopexy. Urogynecology (Phila). 2024 Apr 24. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000001517. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38657626.