INTRODUCTION: Advances in energy devices have played a major role in the rapid expansion of laparoscopic surgery. However, complications due to these energy devices are occasionally reported, and if the characteristics of these devices are not well understood, serious complications may occur. This study evaluated various typical energy devices and measured temperature rises in the adjacent tissue and in the devices themselves. EQUIPMENT AND METHODS: We used the following 7 types of energy devices: AutoSonix (AU), SonoSurg (SS), Harmonic Scalpel (HS), LigaSure Atlas (LA), LigaSure Dolphin Tip (LD), monopolar diathermy (Mono), and bipolar scissors (Bi). Laparoscopy was performed under general anesthesia in pigs, and the mesentery was dissected using each energy device. Tissue temperature at a distance of 1 mm from the energy device blade before and after dissection was measured. Temperature of the device blade both before and after dissection, time required for dissection, and interval until the temperature fell to 100°C, 75°C, and 50°C were documented. RESULTS: Temperature of the surrounding tissue using each device rose the most with the Mono (50.5±8.0°C) and the least with the HS in full mode (6.2±0.7°C). Device temperature itself rose the highest with the AU in full mode (318.2±49.6°C), and the least with the Bi (61.9±4.8°C). All ultrasonic coagulation and cutting devices (AU, SS, and HS) had device temperatures increase up to ≥100°C, and even at 8 seconds after completing dissection, temperatures remained at ≥100°C. CONCLUSIONS: Because the adjacent tissue temperature peaked with the Mono, cautious use near the intestine and blood vessels is necessary. In addition, the active blades of all ultrasonic coagulation and cutting devices, regardless of model, developed high temperatures exceeding 100°C. Therefore, an adequate cooling period after using these devices is therefore necessary between applications.
INTRODUCTION: Advances in energy devices have played a major role in the rapid expansion of laparoscopic surgery. However, complications due to these energy devices are occasionally reported, and if the characteristics of these devices are not well understood, serious complications may occur. This study evaluated various typical energy devices and measured temperature rises in the adjacent tissue and in the devices themselves. EQUIPMENT AND METHODS: We used the following 7 types of energy devices: AutoSonix (AU), SonoSurg (SS), Harmonic Scalpel (HS), LigaSure Atlas (LA), LigaSure Dolphin Tip (LD), monopolar diathermy (Mono), and bipolar scissors (Bi). Laparoscopy was performed under general anesthesia in pigs, and the mesentery was dissected using each energy device. Tissue temperature at a distance of 1 mm from the energy device blade before and after dissection was measured. Temperature of the device blade both before and after dissection, time required for dissection, and interval until the temperature fell to 100°C, 75°C, and 50°C were documented. RESULTS: Temperature of the surrounding tissue using each device rose the most with the Mono (50.5±8.0°C) and the least with the HS in full mode (6.2±0.7°C). Device temperature itself rose the highest with the AU in full mode (318.2±49.6°C), and the least with the Bi (61.9±4.8°C). All ultrasonic coagulation and cutting devices (AU, SS, and HS) had device temperatures increase up to ≥100°C, and even at 8 seconds after completing dissection, temperatures remained at ≥100°C. CONCLUSIONS: Because the adjacent tissue temperature peaked with the Mono, cautious use near the intestine and blood vessels is necessary. In addition, the active blades of all ultrasonic coagulation and cutting devices, regardless of model, developed high temperatures exceeding 100°C. Therefore, an adequate cooling period after using these devices is therefore necessary between applications.
Authors: Alexander Hendricks; Frank Schwandner; Franz Brinkmann; Ronny Hüttner; Philipp J Mehner; Konrad Henkel; Georgi Paschew; Moritz Herzog; Nora Martens; Andreas Richter; Sebastian Hinz; Justus Groß; Clemens Schafmayer; Jochen Hampe Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-10-27 Impact factor: 3.453