🧵regarding one of the most basic and commonly used instruments in surgery...the DeBakey forceps.
DeBakey forceps were designed for vascular and cardiac surgery, but now are used by almost everyone.
I'm surprised myself that we haven't covered it already.
So here goes... 1/
Michael DeBakey doesn't need much introduction: he was one of the most famous surgeons of all time. He was a pioneer in cardiothoracic and vascular surgery and was at Baylor for decades, eventually becoming chancellor. His rivalry with Denton Cooley was the stuff of legends.
DeBakey also was by all accounts very malignant, even when judged against old-school cardiac surgeons in Texas. And other behaviors were problematic. He wouldn't last 24 hr at a US hospital today.
He leaves a large but complex legacy that everyone has their own opinion about.
'DeBakey forceps' were initially custom made for DeBakey himself by the George Pilling & Son Company in Philadelphia. This is the earliest version of the ad I can find, and is from 1960.
The site of the Pilling offices later became the Franklin Building on the Penn campus.
Like most forceps, DeBakeys have a series of ridges on the side to enhance the grip.
This is a modification going back many centuries, as can be seen from the drawing of forceps with similar ridges from the ancient Roman era (R picture, forcep 'G'; from Kirkup's book).
Nor is the general size and profile of the DeBakey forceps anything new.
Forcep 2 on the R picture (also from the Kirkup book) is from the Roman era also. It is remarkably similar to modern DeBakey forceps.
One end of the DeBakey forceps has a single row of teeth. If you look carefully, it also has 2 small grooves (red arrows) which will accommodate the 2 rows of teeth on the other prong of the forcep.
And as you might expect, the other prong has the opposite configuration.
Here there are two rows of teeth, and also a groove to accommodate the single row of teeth from the other prong.
The teeth and grooves fit together with precision, but one sees that they do not do this along the entire length of the row of teeth. There is a little gap present proximally (R photo). The gap closes with a little pressure (not shown).
The small interlocking ridges on the tips of the DeBakey forceps enable you to grab and manipulate needles fairly easily.
It is much harder to do this with forceps without the ridges, such as with 'rat-tooth' forceps on the right.
Example showing the ease of grabbing small needles (5-0 Vicryl on PS-2 here). One can readily manipulate the needle to grab it with the needle holder.
There are limits to this. You want to follow the curvature of the needle and so forth...surgeons often get sloppy here.
One should try to avoid grabbing the actual suture threads though.
In 1989, Dobrin wrote that grasping small Prolene sutures (6-0) with DeBakeys caused them to weaken in a dose dependent fashion.
Grasping the threads with forceps weakened them than most other common maneuvers.
DeBakey forceps can be used to grab many different kinds of tissue, not just vessels. They are precise, tend to grab tissues reasonably well due to the ridges, and tend not to crush the tissue too much, unless one is not careful.
One still needs to keep tissue crushing in mind though, as some can occur with DeBakeys.
Here are 'during' and 'after' pictures of chicken meat grasped for about 15 seconds with a DeBakey at a typical pressure. One can see there are marks left over.
Here are the same 'during' and 'after' pictures, except with toothed Adson forceps.
In some cases toothed forceps may be better for the tissues due to the decreased pressure one has to apply on the tips of the forceps. This is a complicated topic for another day, however...🧐🤔
DeBakey forceps come in different lengths. As they get longer, the tips start having a weaker grip becasue they are still generally of about the same size.
This is a 12" DeBakey. The grip is noticeably weaker, and deforms more easily when picking up objects.
Reference:
As before, chicken thighs were sourced from Draper Valley Farms via QFC market in Beaverton, OR. Accessed December 3, 2022.
The study was conducted under an EFIC (Exception from Informed Chicken) protocol.
⬛️
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A simple but effective tool for cutting bone. As usual, we'll go over its design, how to use it, and why such a basic device still exists in the surgical toolbox in 2026.
We'll also cover its history and the tragic fate of Leonardo Gigli. (1/ )
The main advantage of the Gigli saw is that it's simple. It's just a wire and 2 hooks.
It doesn't require any power or any other equipment and it can be used in austere environments. If you needed to, you could amputate a leg out in the wilderness with a Gigli saw.
The technique is simple. The saw blade is dragged back and forth to cut the bone. It helps if you keep the momentum going and try to minimize 'stopping'.
Also, try to use most of the length of the blade instead of just the middle part, or this part will overheat and break.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I found commentary from a 1967 edition of Look magazine that sounds...familiar.
First: junior doctor dissatisfaction and low pay, and UK physicians leaving for elsewhere: (1/ )
It has always been the case that though much of the conversation has to do with pay, that the true causes of discontent are more complex than that. Again, this was noted more than 50 years ago:
It was noted at the time (once again: 1967) that the practice of having doctors in training move around every few months was a problem. Which I'm gathering, remains an issue.
Temporary shunts for vascular trauma have actually been around for >100 yr. The first widespread use likely began with Prof. Tuffier in France, who used them in wounded soldiers in WW1 (1914-18).
The strategy was different though... (1/ )
Formal vascular repair had been described by Carrel, but was impractical in war conditions due to practically all wounds having massive contamination and delayed presentation, which made the vessels more friable and difficult to suture.
Bernheim had a famous quote on this:
Transport times were much longer then, and most of the wounded who were going to die by exsanguination had already done that.
So instead, the main problem of vascular injury at the time was probably thrombosis of the injured vessel with ischemia of the distal tissues.
🧵regarding the technique of 2-handed knot tying.
It's July again, so it's a good time to revisit this 🧵.
2-handed tying is becoming a lost art in surgery, but I believe it is worth learning. We'll start with just the basic steps. Advanced concepts will come later.
(1/)
If you want your first knot to be square, you generally *don't* want to start off with uncrossed threads (L picture).
Instead, it's better to cross the two threads first before you start tying the knot (R picture).
There are 2 ways to 'cross' the threads, which we'll see next.
When I do my initial crossing of threads, you'll see it can be done in one of two ways:
Either the L strand can be on top, or the R stand can be on top.
I can pick either one, but the one I choose will dictate which 'half' of the 2-handed technique I'll need to do first.
With the ASGBI meeting taking place in Edinburgh, it is prudent to revisit my previous 🧵on the deaths in the movie 'Braveheart'.
As you may recall, the goal was to estimate how many deaths were preventable if trauma surgical care was available in Scotland at the time.
(1/)
Once again, we will make some assumptions here:
- rapid 'scoop and run' transport
- casualties present individually and do not overwhelm the system.
The geography of this area provides certain benefits in terms of casualty allocation, as we'll see.
Specifically...in Braveheart, most of the deaths occurred in the Battle of Stirling and the Battle of Falkirk (approximate locations shown here).
As you can see, most of the major trauma centers in Scotland are located close nearby, making the transport more straightforward.