Literature DB >> 21898022

A single-blind controlled study of electrocautery and ultrasonic scalpel smoke plumes in laparoscopic surgery.

J Edward F Fitzgerald1, Momin Malik, Irfan Ahmed.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgical smoke containing potentially carcinogenic and irritant chemicals is an inevitable consequence of intraoperative energized dissection. Different energized dissection methods have not been compared directly in human laparoscopic surgery or against commonly encountered pollutants. This study undertook an analysis of carcinogenic and irritant volatile hydrocarbon concentrations in electrocautery and ultrasonic scalpel plumes compared with cigarette smoke and urban city air control samples.
METHODS: Once ethical approval was obtained, gas samples were aspirated from the peritoneal cavity after human laparoscopic intraabdominal surgery solely using either electrocautery or ultrasonic scalpels. All were adsorbed in Tenax tubes and concentrations of carcinogenic or irritant volatile hydrocarbons measured by gas chromatography. The results were compared with cigarette smoke and urban city air control samples. The analyzing laboratory was blinded to sample origin.
RESULTS: A total of 10 patients consented to intraoperative gas sampling in which only one method of energized dissection was used. Six carcinogenic or irritant hydrocarbons (benzene, ethylbenzene, styrene, toluene, heptene, and methylpropene) were identified in one or more samples. With the exception of styrene (P = 0.016), a nonsignificant trend toward lower hydrocarbon concentrations was observed with ultrasonic scalpel use. Ultrasonic scalpel plumes had significantly lower hydrocarbon concentrations than cigarette smoke, with the exception of methylpropene (P = 0.332). No significant difference was observed with city air. Electrocautery samples contained significantly lower hydrocarbon concentrations than cigarette smoke, with the exception of toluene (P = 0.117) and methyl propene (P = 0.914). Except for toluene (P = 0.028), city air showed no significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS: Both electrocautery and ultrasonic dissection are associated with significantly lower concentrations of the most commonly detected carcinogenic and irritant hydrocarbons than cigarette smoke. A nonsignificant trend toward lower hydrocarbon concentrations was seen with ultrasonic scalpel dissection compared with diathermy. The contamination levels in city air were largely comparable with those seen after ultrasonic scalpel use. Although hydrocarbon concentrations are low, cumulative exposures may increase health risks. Where concerns arise, ultrasonic scalpel dissection may be preferable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21898022     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-1872-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  8 in total

1.  Carboxyhemoglobinemia due to peritoneal smoke absorption from laser tissue combustion at laparoscopy.

Authors:  D E Ott
Journal:  J Clin Laser Med Surg       Date:  1998-12

2.  Surgical smoke management for minimally invasive (micro)endoscopy: an experimental study.

Authors:  Dietmar Mattes; Edah Silajdzic; Monika Mayer; Martin Horn; Daniel Scheidbach; Werner Wackernagel; Gerald Langmann; Andreas Wedrich
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Current attitudes and practices towards diathermy smoke.

Authors:  John Spearman; George Tsavellas; Paul Nichols
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 1.891

4.  Cytotoxicity of electro-surgical smoke produced in an anoxic environment.

Authors:  C Hensman; E L Newman; S M Shimi; A Cuschieri
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Mutagenicity of smoke condensates induced by CO2-laser irradiation and electrocauterization.

Authors:  Y Tomita; S Mihashi; K Nagata; S Ueda; M Fujiki; M Hirano; T Hirohata
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 2.433

6.  Production and systemic absorption of toxic byproducts of tissue combustion during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  J S Wu; T Monk; D R Luttmann; T A Meininger; N J Soper
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  1998 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Chemical composition of smoke produced by high-frequency electrosurgery.

Authors:  O S Al Sahaf; I Vega-Carrascal; F O Cunningham; J P McGrath; F J Bloomfield
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2007-07-25       Impact factor: 1.568

8.  Infrared spectroscopy on smoke produced by cauterization of animal tissue.

Authors:  Michele Gianella; Markus W Sigrist
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 3.576

  8 in total
  24 in total

Review 1.  Health risks associated with exposure to surgical smoke for surgeons and operation room personnel.

Authors:  Kae Okoshi; Katsutoshi Kobayashi; Koichi Kinoshita; Yasuko Tomizawa; Suguru Hasegawa; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 2.549

2.  Activated carbon fiber filters could reduce the risk of surgical smoke exposure during laparoscopic surgery: application of volatile organic compounds.

Authors:  Seock Hwan Choi; Dong Hee Choi; Dong Hwa Kang; Yun-Sok Ha; Jun Nyung Lee; Bum Soo Kim; Hyun Tae Kim; Eun Sang Yoo; Tae Gyun Kwon; Sung Kwang Chung; Tae-Hwan Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Is surgical smoke harmful to theater staff? a systematic review.

Authors:  Nicholas Mowbray; James Ansell; Neil Warren; Pete Wall; Jared Torkington
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-04-19       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  A prospective, randomized clinical comparison between UltraCision and the novel sealing and cutting device BiCision in patients with laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy.

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

5.  A physics-based algorithm for real-time simulation of electrosurgery procedures in minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Zhonghua Lu; Venkata S Arikatla; Zhongqing Han; Brian F Allen; Suvranu De
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2013-12-19       Impact factor: 2.547

6.  A Technique for Subcutaneous Abdominal Adipose Tissue Biopsy via a Non-diathermy Method.

Authors:  Vasileios Chachopoulos; Petros C Dinas; Markella Chasioti; Athanasios Ζ Jamurtas; Yiannis Koutedakis; Andreas D Flouris
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2017-09-30       Impact factor: 1.355

7.  Surgical Team Exposure to Cautery Smoke and Its Mitigation during Tonsillectomy.

Authors:  Daniel C O'Brien; Eun Gyung Lee; Jhy-Charm Soo; Sherri Friend; Sarah Callaham; Michele M Carr
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 3.497

Review 8.  Consistency of global recommendations regarding open versus laparoscopic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

Authors:  Susan Jacob; Ahmer Hameed; Vincent Lam; Tony Cy Pang
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 2.025

Review 9.  Energy sources in neonatal surgery: principles and practice.

Authors:  Shandip K Sinha; Anjan Dhua
Journal:  J Neonatal Surg       Date:  2014-04-01

10.  Commentary On: "Surgical Smoke - A Health Hazard in the Operating Theatre: A Study to Quantify Exposure and a Survey of the Use of Smoke Extractor Systems in UK Plastic Surgery Units".

Authors:  Nilay R Shah
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2012-08-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.