Abstract
Background
Bipolar electrosurgical devices and ultrasonic devices are routinely used in open and advanced laparoscopic surgery for hemostasis. New electrosurgical and ultrasonic instruments demonstrate improved quality and efficiency in blood vessel sealing.
Methods
The 5-mm laparoscopic Gyrus PKS™ Cutting Forceps (PK), Gyrus Plasma Trissector™ (GP), Harmonic Scalpel® (HS), EnSeal™ Tissue Sealing and Hemostasis System (RX), LigaSure™ V with LigaSure™ Vessel Sealing Generator (LS), LigaSure™ V with Force Triad™ Generator (FT), and Ligamax™ 5 Endoscopic Multiple Clip Applier (LM) were tested to compare burst pressure, sealing time, and failure rate. Each device was used to seal 13 small (2–3 mm diameter), 13 medium (4–5 mm diameter), and 13 large (6–7 mm diameter) arteries from euthanized pigs. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
Mean burst pressures were not statistically different for 2–3 mm or 6–7 mm vessels. For 4–5 mm vessels, LS had the highest mean burst pressure recorded. Mean seal times were shorter for every vessel size when FT was compared with LS (p < 0.05). The shortest sealing times for 2–3 mm vessels were recorded for GP. The shortest sealing times for medium and large vessels were observed with FT. The highest percentage failure rate for each vessel size occurred with GP. For 4–5 mm diameter vessels, the failure rate was 48% for GP, 41% for PK, and 22% for HS. For 6–7 mm diameter vessels, the failure rate was 92% for GP, 41% for PK, and 8% for HS. LM and FT had no recorded failures.
Conclusion
Among the new 5-mm laparoscopic electrosurgical and ultrasonic instruments available for testing, RX, LS, and FT produced the highest mean burst pressures. FT had the shortest mean seal times for medium and large vessels. Minimal or no seal failures occurred with HS, RX, LS, LM, and FT.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Massarweh NN, Cosgriff N, Slakey DP (2006) Electrosurgery: history, principles, and current and future uses. J Am Coll Surg 202:520–530
Harold K L, Pollinger H, Matthews BD, Kercher KW, Sing RF, Heniford BT (2003) Comparison of ultrasonic energy, bipolar thermal energy, and vascular clips for the hemostasis of small-, medium-, and large-sized arteries. Surg Endosc 17:1228–1230
Kennedy JS, Stranahan PL, Taylor KD, Chandler JG (1998) High-burst-strength, feedback-controlled bipolar vessel sealing. Surg Endosc 12:876–878
Harrell AG, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2004) Energy sources in laparoscopy. Semin Laparosc Surg 11:201–209
Carbonell AM, Joels CS, Kercher KW, Matthews BD, Sing RF, Heniford BT (2003) A comparison of laparoscopic bipolar vessel sealing devices in the hemostasis of small-, medium-, and large-sized arteries. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 13:377–380
Denes B, de la Torre RA, Krummel TM, Oleson LSM (2003) Evaluation of a vessel sealing system in a porcine model. In 21st World Congress of Endourology, Moderated poster session, Endourology/Laproscopy: Laboratory & Teaching Montreal, Canada
Landman J, Kerbl K, Rehman J, Andreoni C, Humphrey PA, Collyer W, Olweny E, Sundaram C, Clayman RV (2003) Evaluation of a vessel sealing system, bipolar electrosurgery, harmonic scalpel, titanium clips, endoscopic gastrointestinal anastomosis vascular staples and sutures for arterial and venous ligation in a porcine model. J Urol 169:697–700
Gozen AS, Teber D, Rassweiler JJ (2007) Principles and initial experience of a new device for dissection and hemostasis. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 16:58–65
Lee CL, Huang KG, Wang CJ, Lee PS, Hwang LL (2007) Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy using pulsed bipolar system: comparison with conventional bipolar electrosurgery. Gynecol Oncol 105:620–624
Spivak H, Richardson WS, Hunter JG (1998) The use of bipolar cautery, laparosonic coagulating shears, and vascular clips for hemostasis of small and medium-sized vessels. Surg Endosc 12:183–185
Diamantis T, Kontos M, Arvelakis A, Syroukis S, Koronarchis D, Papalois A, Agapitos E, Bastounis E, Lazaris AC (2006) Comparison of monopolar electrocoagulation, bipolar electrocoagulation, Ultracision, and Ligasure. Surg Today 36:908–913
Campbell PA, Cresswell AB, Frank TG, Cuschieri A (2003) Real-time thermography during energized vessel sealing and dissection. Surg Endosc 17:1640–1645
Kinoshita T, Kanehira E, Omura K, Kawakami K, Watanabe Y (1999) Experimental study on heat production by a 23.5-kHz ultrasonically activated device for endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 13:621–625
Emam TA, Cuschieri A (2003) How safe is high-power ultrasonic dissection? Ann Surg 237:186–191
Sahin DA, Kusaslan R, Sahin O, Akbulut G, Bas O, Dilek ON (2007) Histopathological effects of bipolar vessel sealing devices on liver parenchyma and comparison with suture method: an experimental study. Eur Surg Res 39:111–117
Campagnacci R, de Sanctis A, Baldarelli M, Rimini M, Lezoche G, Guerrieri M (2007) Electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing device vs. ultrasonic coagulating shears in laparoscopic colectomies: a comparative study. Surg Endosc 21:1526–1531
Targarona EM, Balague C, Marin J, Neto RB, Martinez C, Garriga J, Trias M (2005) Energy sources for laparoscopic colectomy: a prospective randomized comparison of conventional electrosurgery, bipolar computer-controlled electrosurgery and ultrasonic dissection. Operative outcome and costs analysis. Surg Innov 12:339–344
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Newcomb, W.L., Hope, W.W., Schmelzer, T.M. et al. Comparison of blood vessel sealing among new electrosurgical and ultrasonic devices. Surg Endosc 23, 90–96 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9932-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9932-x