S Giordano1,2,3, R Kangas1,3, E Veräjänkorva1,3, I Koskivuo1,3. 1. Department of Plastic and General Surgery, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 2. Department of Surgery, Satakunta Central Hospital, Pori, Finland. 3. The University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The most effective dissection technique for raising the flap in abdominoplasty is still controversial, particularly in high-risk massive-weight-loss patients. LigaSure Impact™ vessel-sealing system (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) is an energy device commonly used among different surgical specialties to reduce morbidity and implement outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of LigaSure Impact in abdominoplasty compared with the conventional techniques, diathermia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients underwent primary abdominoplasty after massive weight loss at a single center from 1 January 2008 to 31 May 2015 and were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 94 patients eligible for the study were divided into two groups on basis of the dissection technique: LigaSure Impact group (29 patients) and the conventional technique group (65 patients). Total intraoperative blood loss was the primary endpoint. Duration of the operation, perioperative complications and re-operation were recorded as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. Significant differences were found in intraoperative blood loss favoring LigaSure Impact group (259.6 ± 198.8 mL vs 377.9 ± 190.0 mL, p = 0.004) and blood transfusion rates (13.8% vs 35.4%, p = 0.047). In contrast, operative time was significantly longer in LigaSure Impact group (168.6 ± 121.2 vs 179.7 ± 57.6 min, p = 0.005), while a tendency to shorter hospital stay was found in LigaSure Impact group (3.6 ± 1.1 days vs 4.6 ± 3.2 days, p = 0.081). Overall complications occurrence, Clavien-Dindo grade II (24.1% vs 55.4%) and grade III (13.8% vs 30.8%) complications were significantly lower in LigaSure Impact group (respectively, p = 0.005, p = 0.007, p = 0.016). Late (>30 days) re-operation rate was significantly lower in the LigaSure Impact group (6.9% vs 27.70%, p = 0.0028). Specific wound complications showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: LigaSure Impact vessel-sealing system may be beneficial in improving abdominoplasty outcomes in massive-weight-loss patients because it might reduce blood loss, need for transfusions, complications, and re-operations.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The most effective dissection technique for raising the flap in abdominoplasty is still controversial, particularly in high-risk massive-weight-loss patients. LigaSure Impact™ vessel-sealing system (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) is an energy device commonly used among different surgical specialties to reduce morbidity and implement outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of LigaSure Impact in abdominoplasty compared with the conventional techniques, diathermia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients underwent primary abdominoplasty after massive weight loss at a single center from 1 January 2008 to 31 May 2015 and were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 94 patients eligible for the study were divided into two groups on basis of the dissection technique: LigaSure Impact group (29 patients) and the conventional technique group (65 patients). Total intraoperative blood loss was the primary endpoint. Duration of the operation, perioperative complications and re-operation were recorded as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. Significant differences were found in intraoperative blood loss favoring LigaSure Impact group (259.6 ± 198.8 mL vs 377.9 ± 190.0 mL, p = 0.004) and blood transfusion rates (13.8% vs 35.4%, p = 0.047). In contrast, operative time was significantly longer in LigaSure Impact group (168.6 ± 121.2 vs 179.7 ± 57.6 min, p = 0.005), while a tendency to shorter hospital stay was found in LigaSure Impact group (3.6 ± 1.1 days vs 4.6 ± 3.2 days, p = 0.081). Overall complications occurrence, Clavien-Dindo grade II (24.1% vs 55.4%) and grade III (13.8% vs 30.8%) complications were significantly lower in LigaSure Impact group (respectively, p = 0.005, p = 0.007, p = 0.016). Late (>30 days) re-operation rate was significantly lower in the LigaSure Impact group (6.9% vs 27.70%, p = 0.0028). Specific wound complications showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: LigaSure Impact vessel-sealing system may be beneficial in improving abdominoplasty outcomes in massive-weight-loss patients because it might reduce blood loss, need for transfusions, complications, and re-operations.