Группа авторов

Small Animal Laparoscopy and Thoracoscopy


Скачать книгу

for single‐use raises the questions of the effectiveness of sterility and ability to perform safe and effective seals. Kuvaldina et al. [27] evaluated the number of uses, cleaning, and resterilization cycles with low temperature hydrogen peroxide sterilization for two LigaSure handpieces intended for open surgery. Based on the rate of vascular seal failure, they recommend discarding the Small Jaw handpiece after 9 cycles and the Impact handpiece after 16 cycles. Another study found the LigaSure Atlas handpiece formed an effective seal after 15 uses and resterilization cycles with ethylene oxide [26]. Gardeweg et al. [25] compared the reuse and resterilization of LigaSure, Caiman, and marSeal handpieces with a low temperature steaming process with formaldehyde as an active agent and found that LigaSure, Caiman, and marSeal devices all performed reliable seals after multiple uses and sterilizations except for one Caiman handpiece. Five cycles of sterilization were performed in this study. Performance and microbiological safety of the LigaSure 5 mm Maryland handpiece were evaluated after multiple uses and resterilization cycles by Valenzano et al. [31] Eleven of 12 handpieces failed to activate when the jaws were closed, and the activation button was depressed after a mean of 7.7 cycles. In this study, each handpiece was initially washed in tap water and a 2% enzymatic cleaner solution. The jaws of the instrument were soaked in the 2% enzymatic cleaner solution for five minutes and then scrubbed with a sponge and metal brush and air‐dried. The handpiece was pouch packaged and sterilized with a low‐temperature hydrogen peroxide sterilization unit. Using this protocol for cleaning and sterilization, no handpieces had positive cultures [31]. The 3‐mm JustRightTM vessel sealant device from Bolder Surgical was evaluated for multiple uses and resterilization cycles and was considered safe for use for up to nine reuse and resterilization cycles [32].

Energy device (manufacturer) Monopolar Bipolar Tissue sealing Ultrasonic dissector
Force triad (Valley Lab, Boulder, CO)
Ethicon Gen11 generator (Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH)
Sonicision (Covidien, North Haven, CT)
Altrus (Conmed, Utica NY)
Ultracision (Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH)
Autosonix (Covidien North Haven, CT)
Thunderbeat (Olympus, Center Valley, PA)
JustRightTM JR 100 (Bolder Surgical Louisville, CO)
Caiman Lektrafuse RF generator (Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany)

      Ultrasound waves are sound waves with a frequency above the upper limit of human hearing (>20 kHz). Sound wave energy used in surgical devices typically occurs at frequencies of 23–55 kHz. Ultrasonic surgical devices are capable of cutting, desiccation, protein coagulation, and cavitation (a hybrid form of vaporization facilitating dissection). The advantage of this form of energy is that an electrical circuit is not required, which eliminates the risk of direct and indirect coupling injuries that may occur in laparoscopy, as well as neural stimulation, which can result in cardiac and respiratory arrest.

      An ultrasonic generator delivers an alternating polarity electrical current that is modulated by the generator, directed through the transducer, and converted to sound energy. This conversion of current into sound energy occurs as the piezoelectric current is directed through a series of stacked ceramic plates within the transducer. The vibration of the ceramic plates at 55 500 times per second produces sound waves or harmonic frequency, which generates mechanical energy. Sound energy propagates down the shaft of the instrument to the tip, leading to axial displacement of the instrument tip. An increase in power on the generator leads to an increase in axial displacement of the instrument tip, leading to an increased cutting rate.

      A study by Newcomb et al. [17] compared vessel sealing in a porcine model with electrosurgical and ultrasonic devices. They found that vessel sealant devices had the highest mean burst pressures compared with ultrasonic dissectors. More seal failures were seen overall with the ultrasonic dissector than with the vessel sealant devices. However, for vessels 2–3 mm in diameter, the ultrasonic dissector did not have any seal failures, but the vessel sealant devices did. This study emphasizes the fact that ultrasonic dissectors consistently seal vessels less than 3 mm but perform inconsistently with larger vessel diameters.

Photo depicts sonicision is a cordless ultrasonic dissector that is approved for sealing vessels up to 5 mm in diameter.

      Source: