Karolin Thiel1, Walter Linzenbold2, Markus D Enderle2, B Nold2, Alfred Königsrainer3, Martin Schenk3, Christian Thiel3. 1. Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Tuebingen University Hospital, Hoppe-Seyler Strasse 3, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. Karolin.Thiel@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 2. Research and Basic Technologies Department, Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH, Tuebingen, Germany. 3. Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Tuebingen University Hospital, Hoppe-Seyler Strasse 3, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bipolar vessel sealing has been successfully introduced in a variety of procedures like prostatectomy, hysterectomy, and nephrectomy. In this study, we evaluated a new sealing mode-the thermoSEAL® mode (TSM)-operated with the VIO3 generator in an ex vivo and in vivo animal study and compared the results with the commercially available BiClamp mode (BCM), operated with the VIO300D generator. Two different instruments were used in combination with both modes, BiCision® and BiClamp® 201T (Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH). METHODS: In the ex vivo experiment, the sealing of renal arteries was evaluated using both instruments and modes. For the in vivo study, different types of arteries and veins were sealed using both modes and instruments in a side-by-side comparison for acute complications in a total of four animals. RESULTS: Mean burst pressure was in all cases significantly above 360 mmHg (p < 0.001). Sealing time during the ex vivo setting was significantly shorter for TSM compared to BCM: BiCision® (3.7 ± 0.4 vs. 7.1 ± 0.3 s; p < 0.0001); BiClamp® 201T (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 5.1 ± 1.1 s; p < 0.0015). Lateral thermal damage was more pronounced for BCM: BiCision® (TSM 1.4 ± 0.3 mm vs. BCM 1.9 ± 0.2 mm; p < 0.0001); BiClamp® 201T (TSM 1.9 ± 0.6 mm vs. BCM 3.1 ± 0.6 mm; p < 0.0001). The sealing time during the in vivo study was significantly shorter for TSM in combination with BiCision® for arteries [TSM 3.0 ± 0.7 s vs. BCM 6.5 ± 1.3 s, (p < 0.0001) and veins 3.2 ± 1.1 vs. 5.8 ± 1.8 s, (p < 0.0001)]. No significant differences were seen for the two modes used with BiClamp® 201T [artery: TSM 3.3 ± 0.7 s vs. BCM 3.4 ± 0.9 s, (p = 0.891)]. High sealing rates for arteries (100%) and veins (>90%) were noted for both instruments and modes. CONCLUSIONS: While both modes used with two different instruments reveal high safety characterized by a high burst pressure, low thermal damage (ex vivo) zones, and high sealing rates (in vivo), the thermoSEAL® mode convinces by its fast sealing speed probably helping to reduce operation time.
BACKGROUND: Bipolar vessel sealing has been successfully introduced in a variety of procedures like prostatectomy, hysterectomy, and nephrectomy. In this study, we evaluated a new sealing mode-the thermoSEAL® mode (TSM)-operated with the VIO3 generator in an ex vivo and in vivo animal study and compared the results with the commercially available BiClamp mode (BCM), operated with the VIO300D generator. Two different instruments were used in combination with both modes, BiCision® and BiClamp® 201T (Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH). METHODS: In the ex vivo experiment, the sealing of renal arteries was evaluated using both instruments and modes. For the in vivo study, different types of arteries and veins were sealed using both modes and instruments in a side-by-side comparison for acute complications in a total of four animals. RESULTS: Mean burst pressure was in all cases significantly above 360 mmHg (p < 0.001). Sealing time during the ex vivo setting was significantly shorter for TSM compared to BCM: BiCision® (3.7 ± 0.4 vs. 7.1 ± 0.3 s; p < 0.0001); BiClamp® 201T (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 5.1 ± 1.1 s; p < 0.0015). Lateral thermal damage was more pronounced for BCM: BiCision® (TSM 1.4 ± 0.3 mm vs. BCM 1.9 ± 0.2 mm; p < 0.0001); BiClamp® 201T (TSM 1.9 ± 0.6 mm vs. BCM 3.1 ± 0.6 mm; p < 0.0001). The sealing time during the in vivo study was significantly shorter for TSM in combination with BiCision® for arteries [TSM 3.0 ± 0.7 s vs. BCM 6.5 ± 1.3 s, (p < 0.0001) and veins 3.2 ± 1.1 vs. 5.8 ± 1.8 s, (p < 0.0001)]. No significant differences were seen for the two modes used with BiClamp® 201T [artery: TSM 3.3 ± 0.7 s vs. BCM 3.4 ± 0.9 s, (p = 0.891)]. High sealing rates for arteries (100%) and veins (>90%) were noted for both instruments and modes. CONCLUSIONS: While both modes used with two different instruments reveal high safety characterized by a high burst pressure, low thermal damage (ex vivo) zones, and high sealing rates (in vivo), the thermoSEAL® mode convinces by its fast sealing speed probably helping to reduce operation time.
Authors: Ralf Rothmund; Daniel Schaeller; Alexander Neugebauer A; Marcus Scharpf M; Falko Fend F; Martin Schenk; Diethelm Wallwiener; Bernhard Kraemer Journal: J Invest Surg Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 2.533
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: Mario Santini; Alfonso Fiorelli; Roberta Milione; Giovanni Vicidomini; Marina Accardo Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2014-07-03
Authors: Bernhard Kraemer; Christos Tsaousidis; Stephan Kruck; Martin Schenk; Marcus Scharpf; Stefan Kommoss; Sara Brucker; Daniela Nuessle; Markus D Enderle; Ulrich Biber Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 2.102