Applicability of the new ITKA GSD Basic 250 electrosurgical unit to urologic endoscopic surgery, laparoscopic surgery and urologic open surgery

被引:0
|
作者
Lukkarinen, O [1 ]
Tuuttila, P
机构
[1] Univ Oulu, Dept Surg, Oulu, Finland
[2] Innokas Med LTD, Oulu, Finland
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
The purpose of the study was to assess the applicability of a new ITKA GSD Basic 250 electrosurgical unit (ESU) to urologic endoscopic surgery, laparoscopic surgery and open urologic surgery, ifs possible interference with videorecording and stray currents in healthy tissues. A new ITKA GSD Basic 250 ESU (test ESU) was used and compared to conventional ESU (Berchtold Elektrotom 390 as reference ESU). Experimental surgery was carried out on three female pigs, which underwent endoscopic, laparoscopic and open surgery. Altogether 29 patients underwent either endoscopic or open surgery with the test ESU. In experimental surgery, the ideal cutting and coagulation settings of the test ESU were in the range 15-25 % for endoscopic surgery. In laparoscopic surgery, tissues were ideally resected and removed at 10-15 % power settings. In open experimental surgery, the ideal power settings were 29-30 %. In human surgery, the test ESU operated well at 25-35 % power settings in endoscopic surgery, while in open surgery on humans the ideal settings were 25-35 % in monopolar we and 20-25 % in bipolar use. When used for endoscopic operations, the test ESU did not interfere with videorecording. Nor were any adverse effects seen in the surrounding tissues. The patients had neither early nor late complications. Histopathological findings revealed no differences in healing between the test ESU and reference ESU. Experimental and patient surgery showed the test ESU to be both safe and effective. It is suitable to be used in urologic endoscopic surgery, laparoscopic surgery and open urologic surgery. It does not interfere with videorecording or cause harmful stray currents in surrounding tissues. Power can be adjusted linearly and precisely. Low-power operation is also possible.
引用
收藏
页码:270 / 273
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Surgeons' perceptions and injuries during and after urologic laparoscopic surgery
    Gofrit, Ofer N.
    Mikahail, Albert A.
    Zorn, Kevin C.
    Zagaja, Gregory P.
    Steinberg, Gary D.
    Shalhav, Arieh L.
    UROLOGY, 2008, 71 (03) : 404 - 407
  • [42] Role of the Laparoscopic Approach for Complex Urologic Surgery in the Era of Robotics
    Andras, Iulia
    Territo, Angelo
    Telecan, Teodora
    Medan, Paul
    Perciuleac, Ion
    Berindean, Alexandru
    Stanca, Dan V.
    Buzoianu, Maximilian
    Coman, Ioan
    Crisan, Nicolae
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (09)
  • [43] CONTROLLED BALLOON DILATATION OF THE EXTRAPERITONEAL SPACE FOR LAPAROSCOPIC UROLOGIC SURGERY
    HIRSCH, IH
    MORENO, JG
    LOTFI, MA
    GOMELLA, LG
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC SURGERY, 1994, 4 (04): : 247 - 251
  • [44] EDITORIAL COMMENT: UROLOGIC SURGERY LAPAROSCOPIC ACCESS: VASCULAR COMPLICATIONS
    Sapre, Nikhil
    Zargar, Homayoun
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2017, 43 (01): : 167 - 167
  • [45] RISK FACTORS FOR POSTOPERATIVE ILEUS AFTER UROLOGIC LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY
    Kim, M. J.
    Min, G. E.
    Yoo, K. H.
    Jeon, S. H.
    Chang, S.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2010, 24 : A238 - A238
  • [46] ENDOCAVITARY (LAPAROSCOPIC) PELVIC LYMPHADENECTOMY WITH SPECIFIC INDICATIONS IN UROLOGIC SURGERY
    BOULLIER, JA
    HAGOOD, PG
    PARRA, RO
    UROLOGY, 1993, 41 (01) : 19 - 25
  • [47] Management of intraoperative splenic injury during laparoscopic urologic surgery
    Chung, BI
    Gill, IS
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2006, 175 (04): : 27 - 28
  • [48] Risk factors for postoperative ileus after urologic laparoscopic surgery
    Kim, Myung Joon
    Min, Gyeong Eun
    Yoo, Koo Han
    Chang, Sung-Goo
    Jeon, Seung Hyun
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN SURGICAL SOCIETY, 2011, 80 (06): : 384 - 389
  • [49] Serum laboratory values following uncomplicated laparoscopic urologic surgery
    Anderson, JK
    D Matsumoto, E
    Abdel-Aziz, KF
    Svatek, RS
    Cadeddu, JA
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2005, 173 (04): : 316 - 317
  • [50] PATIENT-REPORTED COSMESIS OUTCOMES FOLLOWING UROLOGIC SURGERY: LESS VS. LAPAROSCOPIC VS. OPEN SURGERY
    Park, Samuel
    Olweny, Ephrem
    Best, Sara
    Mir, Saad
    Tracy, Chad
    Cadeddu, Jeffrey
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (04): : E311 - E311