BACKGROUND: During the past few years, a variety of energy-based techniques for vessel ligation have been introduced. With the use of a porcine model and different devices for bipolar vessel sealing (BiClamp and LigaSure), we studied the impact of different clamp surface structures on the efficacy and quality of vessel sealing. METHODS: Eight Swabian Hall pigs underwent splenectomy, nephrectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, and small bowel resection with the use of bipolar vessel sealing devices designed for open and laparoscopic surgery. Vessel sealing with clamps with a smooth (nonstructured) surface (BiClamp for open surgery and LigaSure for laparoscopic surgery) was compared to that of clamps with a structured (grooved, wafer-like) surface (BiClamp for laparoscopic surgery and LigaSure for open surgery). Measurements of sealed vessels (2- to 7-mm diameter) included the seal failure rate, instrument sticking, and heat-associated morphological vascular wall alterations. RESULTS: Analysis of seal failures did not reveal significant differences between the different devices for both open [BiClamp, 17.9% (17/95); LigaSure, 15.5% (11/71)] and laparoscopic surgery [BiClamp, 2.8% (1/36); LigaSure, 8.6% (3/35)]. Comparing all data of structured versus smooth clamp surfaces, the seal failure rate was lower using clamps with a structured (11.2%) compared to a smooth surface (15.4%). Instrument sticking and thermal spread were found to be significantly increased after sealing with structured surfaces, regardless of whether devices designed for open (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) or laparoscopic surgery (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively) were used. CONCLUSION: Clamps with a structured surface seem to be superior to those with a smooth surface for successful bipolar vessel sealing, as indicated by an increase of thermal spread. However, the more pronounced instrument sticking represents an undesired side effect and should encourage the search for more inert materials to further improve the sealing procedure.
BACKGROUND: During the past few years, a variety of energy-based techniques for vessel ligation have been introduced. With the use of a porcine model and different devices for bipolar vessel sealing (BiClamp and LigaSure), we studied the impact of different clamp surface structures on the efficacy and quality of vessel sealing. METHODS: Eight Swabian Hall pigs underwent splenectomy, nephrectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, and small bowel resection with the use of bipolar vessel sealing devices designed for open and laparoscopic surgery. Vessel sealing with clamps with a smooth (nonstructured) surface (BiClamp for open surgery and LigaSure for laparoscopic surgery) was compared to that of clamps with a structured (grooved, wafer-like) surface (BiClamp for laparoscopic surgery and LigaSure for open surgery). Measurements of sealed vessels (2- to 7-mm diameter) included the seal failure rate, instrument sticking, and heat-associated morphological vascular wall alterations. RESULTS: Analysis of seal failures did not reveal significant differences between the different devices for both open [BiClamp, 17.9% (17/95); LigaSure, 15.5% (11/71)] and laparoscopic surgery [BiClamp, 2.8% (1/36); LigaSure, 8.6% (3/35)]. Comparing all data of structured versus smooth clamp surfaces, the seal failure rate was lower using clamps with a structured (11.2%) compared to a smooth surface (15.4%). Instrument sticking and thermal spread were found to be significantly increased after sealing with structured surfaces, regardless of whether devices designed for open (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) or laparoscopic surgery (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively) were used. CONCLUSION: Clamps with a structured surface seem to be superior to those with a smooth surface for successful bipolar vessel sealing, as indicated by an increase of thermal spread. However, the more pronounced instrument sticking represents an undesired side effect and should encourage the search for more inert materials to further improve the sealing procedure.
Authors: Jaime Landman; Kurt Kerbl; Jamil Rehman; Cassio Andreoni; Peter A Humphrey; William Collyer; Ephrem Olweny; Chandru Sundaram; Ralph V Clayman Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ralf Rothmund; Bernhard Kraemer; Felix Neis; Sara Brucker; Markus Wallwiener; Ali Reda; Andrea Hausch; Marcus Scharpf; Mara Natascha Szyrach Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-06-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Benjamin Person; David A Vivas; Dan Ruiz; Michael Talcott; James E Coad; Steven D Wexner Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-12-20 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: David Sindram; Kimberly Martin; Jarrod P Meadows; Ajita S Prabhu; Jessica J Heath; Iain H McKillop; David A Iannitti Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-03-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ralf Rothmund; Mara Szyrach; Ali Reda; Markus D Enderle; Alexander Neugebauer; Florin-Andrei Taran; Sara Brucker; Andrea Hausch; Christian Wallwiener; Bernhard Kraemer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-05-14 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Karolin Thiel; Walter Linzenbold; Markus D Enderle; B Nold; Alfred Königsrainer; Martin Schenk; Christian Thiel Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ganesh Sankaranarayanan; Rajeswara R Resapu; Daniel B Jones; Steven Schwaitzberg; Suvranu De Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-04-23 Impact factor: 4.584