Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Laparoscopic ultrasonic dissectors: technology update by a review of literature
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Laparoscopic ultrasonic dissectors: technology update by a review of literature
Do you wish to request the book?
Laparoscopic ultrasonic dissectors: technology update by a review of literature
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Laparoscopic ultrasonic dissectors: technology update by a review of literature
2019
Overview
The evolution of minimally invasive surgery has brought forward the appearance of new advances in the course of the most recent couple of years and has introduced energy-based devices. The newest among them today are the ultrasonically activated devices, which are utilized with a great deal of components in-play, including ergonomics and financial aspects amid surgery. The methodology embraced was finding significant investigations through studies from PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar on current ultrasonic dissectors, which are Ethicon's Harmonic Scalpel (ACE
), Covidien's Sonicision™ (SNC), Conmed's SonoSurg
(SS) and Olympus's Thunderbeat
, to describe their efficacy in terms of vessel sealing speed, vessel burst pressure, visibility, operation time and thermal speed. We found postmarketing evidence to determine which device exhibits the better performance. Animal studies showed that emissivity values and maximum temperatures for coagulation are similar among devices but maximum cutting temperatures are significantly different: ACE = 191.1°C, SNC = 227.1°C, SS = 184.8°C (
< 0.001). Cooling times are significantly different among devices: 35.7 s for ACE, 38.7 s for SNC and 27.4 s for SS (
< 0.001). Cooling times of passive jaws to reach 60°C after activation were also significantly different: 25.4 s for ACE, 5.7 s for SNC, and 15.4 s for SS (
< 0.001). The perfect device would unify brilliant hemostatic outcomes with visual sharpness while permitting none or insignificant thermal damage at the place of use.
Publisher
Dove Medical Press Limited,Taylor & Francis Ltd,Dove Medical Press
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.