BACKGROUND: Various surgical small intestinal anastomosis methods are in current use, but improvements are always desired. Thus, we compared the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of a new high-frequency electric welding (HFEW) system for sealing the small bowel versus a hand-sewn in vivo pig model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 96 bowel segments of three pigs were randomized to be sutured either by the HFEW-300 PATONMED device (E.O. Paton Electric Welding Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev, Ukraine) or hand-sewn, and mucosa-to-mucosa fusions were subjected in vivo testing in the pigs. Bursting pressures, suture time, thermal damage, and the temperature of sealed ends were measured. RESULTS: Segments that had been treated with a hand-sutured ligature or double-sealed with HFEW were compared. Burst pressure was significantly higher in the hand-sutured group than in the HFEW group (136.2 mm Hg versus 75.8 mm Hg, P<.01). All 48 pig small bowels closed by the HFEW-300 generator showed a success rate of 100.0%. The closing time in the HFEW group was significantly shorter (P<.01). The pathological changes of the closed ends were mainly presented as acute thermal- and pressure-induced injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of the current in vivo study suggest that HFEW is an effective and safe method for ligation of the small bowel in pigs.
BACKGROUND: Various surgical small intestinal anastomosis methods are in current use, but improvements are always desired. Thus, we compared the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of a new high-frequency electric welding (HFEW) system for sealing the small bowel versus a hand-sewn in vivo pig model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 96 bowel segments of three pigs were randomized to be sutured either by the HFEW-300 PATONMED device (E.O. Paton Electric Welding Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev, Ukraine) or hand-sewn, and mucosa-to-mucosa fusions were subjected in vivo testing in the pigs. Bursting pressures, suture time, thermal damage, and the temperature of sealed ends were measured. RESULTS: Segments that had been treated with a hand-sutured ligature or double-sealed with HFEW were compared. Burst pressure was significantly higher in the hand-sutured group than in the HFEW group (136.2 mm Hg versus 75.8 mm Hg, P<.01). All 48 pig small bowels closed by the HFEW-300 generator showed a success rate of 100.0%. The closing time in the HFEW group was significantly shorter (P<.01). The pathological changes of the closed ends were mainly presented as acute thermal- and pressure-induced injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of the current in vivo study suggest that HFEW is an effective and safe method for ligation of the small bowel in pigs.