BACKGROUND: Various energy sources are available for tissue dissection and vessel sealing in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing system (EBVS) and ultrasonic energy (UE) devices are widely used to provide hemostatic dissection in laparoscopic procedures. Nevertheless, available evidenced-based data comparing their operative results still are scarce. This study conducted a metaanalysis of controlled clinical trials comparing EBVS and UE in terms of operative time and intraoperative blood losses in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched using medical subject headings and free text words. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials using EBVS and UE in laparoscopic colorectal surgery were considered for inclusion in the study. Random effects models were used in case of heterogeneity to obtain summary statistics for the overall difference in operating time and blood loss between instruments. RESULTS: Four studies comparing EBVS with UE for 397 patients (200 EBVS vs. 197 UE patients) were included in the study. The findings showed that EBVS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss than UE (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The metaanalysis indicated that EBVS is associated with a shorter operative time and less blood loss than UE in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity of the included trials and the limited number of studies with a high level of evidence. More adequately designed RCTs with a larger number of patients are required to confirm the results of this metaanalysis.
BACKGROUND: Various energy sources are available for tissue dissection and vessel sealing in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing system (EBVS) and ultrasonic energy (UE) devices are widely used to provide hemostatic dissection in laparoscopic procedures. Nevertheless, available evidenced-based data comparing their operative results still are scarce. This study conducted a metaanalysis of controlled clinical trials comparing EBVS and UE in terms of operative time and intraoperative blood losses in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched using medical subject headings and free text words. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials using EBVS and UE in laparoscopic colorectal surgery were considered for inclusion in the study. Random effects models were used in case of heterogeneity to obtain summary statistics for the overall difference in operating time and blood loss between instruments. RESULTS: Four studies comparing EBVS with UE for 397 patients (200 EBVS vs. 197 UE patients) were included in the study. The findings showed that EBVS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss than UE (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The metaanalysis indicated that EBVS is associated with a shorter operative time and less blood loss than UE in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity of the included trials and the limited number of studies with a high level of evidence. More adequately designed RCTs with a larger number of patients are required to confirm the results of this metaanalysis.
Authors: Mark Buunen; Ruben Veldkamp; Wim C J Hop; Esther Kuhry; Johannes Jeekel; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio Lacy; Hendrik J Bonjer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: M Charalambides; T Afxentiou; G Pellino; M P Powar; N S Fearnhead; R J Davies; J Wheeler; C Simillis Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-02-07 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Hang Cheng; Jeffrey W Clymer; Behnam Sadeghirad; Nicole C Ferko; Chris G Cameron; Joseph F Amaral Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 2.754