Most physicians can tell very similar stories. At the start of the laparoscopic surgery revolution, I remember well using ziplock baggies (yes, from the grocery store) to remove diseased tissue from the abdomen. Part of the reason they worked so well is that one side of the bag opening is blue and the other yellow, so it was easier to see both edges to grasp and bring out without spilling the tissue. And we really didn’t have anything else yet- techniques outstripped devices for a few years.
Fast forward a couple of years the devices caught up. Unfortunately, my little 5 cent baggie was replaced by a $75 model, and all the equipment went from being reusable to disposable. The cost of this particular procedure doubled. While I do believe that the procedure was made a little easier- and possibly safer- I have to wonder if the marginal benefit was worth it. To my knowledge, there was never any data to show it either way. However, I think there is no doubt that equipment advances made many other laparoscopic procedures possible that couldn’t be done before.
Technology is a double-edge sword. It’s almost always more expensive than older treatments and often no better at all- the laser fad is (was) a good example of that. Hopefully, the changes like those proposed in this article will help with the former problem, but the latter problem isn’t up to the FDA or any government organization- it’s up to the doctors who have to be able to tell the difference between revolutionary technology and the gadget-of-the-day, and we don’t seem to have good ways to do that efficiently.
