BACKGROUND/AIMS: Our goal was to compare the benefits and complications of using an ultrasonically activated scalpel (UAS) and conventional blunt dissection in hepatic resection. METHODOLOGY: We evaluated the effectiveness of dividing the liver by UAS (n=18) (the UAS group) compared with conventional blunt dissection (n=34) (the BD group) in patients undergoing hepatic resection. In the UAS group, UAS was used to dissect the superficial parenchyma and a crushing and clamping technique was used to divide the deep parenchyma. RESULTS: No serious complications attributable to the use of UAS were encountered, and there were no significant differences in morbidity or mortality between the two groups. The duration of surgery was significantly longer in the UAS group (281 +/- 81 min) than in the BD group (223 +/- 76 min) (P<0.05), and in the UAS group as a whole there were no advantages in using the new scalpel. However, when we compared only those patients who underwent minor hepatectomy, the intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the UAS group (657 +/- 588mL) than in the BD group (1447 +/- 984mL) (P=0.03). The duration of drainage from the hepatic stump in these patients was also significantly shorter in the UAS group (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The UAS is a useful new device for transection of the liver during hepatic resection. It may reduce the amount of blood loss during liver surgery, particularly in minor hepatectomy.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Our goal was to compare the benefits and complications of using an ultrasonically activated scalpel (UAS) and conventional blunt dissection in hepatic resection. METHODOLOGY: We evaluated the effectiveness of dividing the liver by UAS (n=18) (the UAS group) compared with conventional blunt dissection (n=34) (the BD group) in patients undergoing hepatic resection. In the UAS group, UAS was used to dissect the superficial parenchyma and a crushing and clamping technique was used to divide the deep parenchyma. RESULTS: No serious complications attributable to the use of UAS were encountered, and there were no significant differences in morbidity or mortality between the two groups. The duration of surgery was significantly longer in the UAS group (281 +/- 81 min) than in the BD group (223 +/- 76 min) (P<0.05), and in the UAS group as a whole there were no advantages in using the new scalpel. However, when we compared only those patients who underwent minor hepatectomy, the intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the UAS group (657 +/- 588mL) than in the BD group (1447 +/- 984mL) (P=0.03). The duration of drainage from the hepatic stump in these patients was also significantly shorter in the UAS group (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The UAS is a useful new device for transection of the liver during hepatic resection. It may reduce the amount of blood loss during liver surgery, particularly in minor hepatectomy.
Authors: Matthew R Porembka; M B Majella Doyle; Nicholas A Hamilton; Peter O Simon; Steven M Strasberg; David C Linehan; William G Hawkins Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 3.647