Safety and effectiveness of a novel generator algorithm for bipolar vessel sealing: a randomised controlled chronic animal study.
Algorithm
Animal model
Burst pressure
Sealing time
Swine
Thermal damage
Journal
BMC surgery
ISSN: 1471-2482
Titre abrégé: BMC Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968567
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Nov 2019
05 Nov 2019
Historique:
received:
12
04
2019
accepted:
15
10
2019
entrez:
7
11
2019
pubmed:
7
11
2019
medline:
28
1
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Electrosurgical vessel sealers are gradually replacing conventional techniques such as ligation and clipping. Algorithms that control electrosurgical units (ESU), known as modes, are important for applications in different surgical disciplines. This chronic porcine animal study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the novel thermoSEAL electrosurgical vessel sealing mode (TSM). The BiClamp® mode (BCM) of the renowned VIO® 300 D ESU served as control. BCM has been widely available since 2002 and has since been successfully used in many surgical disciplines. The TSM, for the novel VIO® 3 ESU, was developed to reduce sealing time and/or thermal lateral spread adjacent to the seal while maintaining clinical success rates. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the long-term and intraoperative seal quality of TSM. The BiCision® device was used for vessel sealing with TSM and BCM in ten German Landrace pigs which underwent splenectomy and unilateral nephrectomy during the first intervention of the study. The seals were cut with the BiCision® knife. Ninety-nine arteries, veins and vascular bundles were chronically sealed for 5 or 21 days. Thereafter, during the second and terminal intervention of the study, 97 additional arteries and veins were sealed. The carotid arteries were used for histological evaluation of thermal spread. After each survival period, no long-term complications occurred with either mode. The intraoperative seal failure rates, i.e. vessel leaking or residual blood flow after the first sealing activation, were 2% with TSM versus 6% with BCM (p = 0.28). The sealing time was significantly shorter with TSM (3.5 ± 0.69 s vs. 7.3 ± 1.3 s, p < 0.0001). The thermal spread and burst pressure of arteries sealed with both modes were similar (p = 0.18 and p = 0.61) and corresponded to the histological evaluation. The measured tissue sticking parameter was rare with both modes (p = 0.33). Tissue charring did not occur. Regarding the cut quality, 97% of the seals were severed in the first and 3% in the second attempt (both with TSM and BCM). The novel TSM seals blood vessels twice as fast as the BCM while maintaining excellent tissue effect and clinical success rates. Not applicable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Electrosurgical vessel sealers are gradually replacing conventional techniques such as ligation and clipping. Algorithms that control electrosurgical units (ESU), known as modes, are important for applications in different surgical disciplines. This chronic porcine animal study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the novel thermoSEAL electrosurgical vessel sealing mode (TSM). The BiClamp® mode (BCM) of the renowned VIO® 300 D ESU served as control. BCM has been widely available since 2002 and has since been successfully used in many surgical disciplines. The TSM, for the novel VIO® 3 ESU, was developed to reduce sealing time and/or thermal lateral spread adjacent to the seal while maintaining clinical success rates. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the long-term and intraoperative seal quality of TSM.
METHODS
METHODS
The BiCision® device was used for vessel sealing with TSM and BCM in ten German Landrace pigs which underwent splenectomy and unilateral nephrectomy during the first intervention of the study. The seals were cut with the BiCision® knife. Ninety-nine arteries, veins and vascular bundles were chronically sealed for 5 or 21 days. Thereafter, during the second and terminal intervention of the study, 97 additional arteries and veins were sealed. The carotid arteries were used for histological evaluation of thermal spread.
RESULTS
RESULTS
After each survival period, no long-term complications occurred with either mode. The intraoperative seal failure rates, i.e. vessel leaking or residual blood flow after the first sealing activation, were 2% with TSM versus 6% with BCM (p = 0.28). The sealing time was significantly shorter with TSM (3.5 ± 0.69 s vs. 7.3 ± 1.3 s, p < 0.0001). The thermal spread and burst pressure of arteries sealed with both modes were similar (p = 0.18 and p = 0.61) and corresponded to the histological evaluation. The measured tissue sticking parameter was rare with both modes (p = 0.33). Tissue charring did not occur. Regarding the cut quality, 97% of the seals were severed in the first and 3% in the second attempt (both with TSM and BCM).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The novel TSM seals blood vessels twice as fast as the BCM while maintaining excellent tissue effect and clinical success rates.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Not applicable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31690302
doi: 10.1186/s12893-019-0625-2
pii: 10.1186/s12893-019-0625-2
pmc: PMC6833204
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
160Références
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012 May;22(4):378-86
pubmed: 22364404
J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2689-93
pubmed: 17945280
Surg Endosc. 2011 Aug;25(8):2604-12
pubmed: 21404086
Surg Endosc. 2006 Jun;20(6):890-4
pubmed: 16738977
Surg Endosc. 2011 Feb;25(2):577-85
pubmed: 20614136
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 Sep-Oct;15(5):605-10
pubmed: 18640881
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2012 Nov;21(6):402-7
pubmed: 22455599
Surg Endosc. 2012 Aug;26(8):2388-93
pubmed: 22350233
Fertil Steril. 2007 Jul;88(1):206-11
pubmed: 17462642
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2006 Apr;16(2):149-55
pubmed: 16646707
Surg Endosc. 2003 Aug;17(8):1228-30
pubmed: 12799888
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013 Aug;23(8):669-72
pubmed: 23755852
Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1640-5
pubmed: 12874690
J Surg Res. 2014 Jan;186(1):73-80
pubmed: 24035229
J Endourol. 2003 Apr;17(3):181-5
pubmed: 12803992
Surg Endosc. 2012 Nov;26(11):3334-43
pubmed: 22678171
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2012 Nov;21(6):396-401
pubmed: 22292919
Surg Endosc. 2018 Mar;32(3):1456-1463
pubmed: 28924734
Surg Endosc. 2009 Jan;23(1):90-6
pubmed: 18483824
Surg Endosc. 2008 Feb;22(2):534-8
pubmed: 18097720
World J Surg. 2008 Sep;32(9):1968-73
pubmed: 18566858
Surg Endosc. 2012 Sep;26(9):2541-9
pubmed: 22447285
Surg Today. 2006;36(10):908-13
pubmed: 16998685
Surg Endosc. 1998 Jun;12(6):876-8
pubmed: 9602010
Surg Innov. 2015 Aug;22(4):329-37
pubmed: 25878211
Acta Vet Hung. 2012 Mar;60(1):27-40
pubmed: 22366130
Urology. 2008 Apr;71(4):744-8
pubmed: 18289646
Br J Surg. 2011 Jun;98(6):797-800
pubmed: 21442611
Surg Innov. 2015 Aug;22(4):338-43
pubmed: 25851145
J Endourol. 2005 Jan-Feb;19(1):107-10
pubmed: 15735394
JSLS. 2014 Jul-Sep;18(3):null
pubmed: 25392611
Fertil Steril. 2011 Feb;95(2):795-8
pubmed: 20951375
J Urol. 2003 Feb;169(2):697-700
pubmed: 12544345
Surg Endosc. 1998 Feb;12(2):183-5
pubmed: 9479741