Cargando…

Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) using surgical electrocautery is considered to be the gold standard procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated cholecystitis and cholelithiasis. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Harmo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liao, Guanqun, Wen, Shunqian, Xie, Xueyi, Wu, Qing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4978547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27547026
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2016.00037
_version_ 1782447191872241664
author Liao, Guanqun
Wen, Shunqian
Xie, Xueyi
Wu, Qing
author_facet Liao, Guanqun
Wen, Shunqian
Xie, Xueyi
Wu, Qing
author_sort Liao, Guanqun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) using surgical electrocautery is considered to be the gold standard procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated cholecystitis and cholelithiasis. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Harmonic scalpel, an advanced laparoscopic technique associated with less thermal damage in LC, when compared to electrocautery. METHODS: From October 2010 through June 2013, a total of 198 patients were randomly allocated to LC with a Harmonic scalpel (experimental group, 117 patients) or conventional monopolar electrocautery (control group, 81 patients). The main outcome measures were operative time, blood loss, conversion to laparotomy, postoperative hospital stay, post-LC pain, and cost effectiveness. RESULTS: The 2 groups were comparable with respect to baseline patient characteristics. When compared to conventional monopolar electrocautery, there were no significant reductions in the operative time, bleeding, frequency of conversion to laparotomy, and duration of postoperative recovery with the Harmonic scalpel (P > .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using conventional monopolar electrocautery is as effective and safe as that with the Harmonic scalpel, for treating uncomplicated cholecystitis and cholelithiasis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4978547
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49785472016-08-19 Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy Liao, Guanqun Wen, Shunqian Xie, Xueyi Wu, Qing JSLS Scientific Papers BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) using surgical electrocautery is considered to be the gold standard procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated cholecystitis and cholelithiasis. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the Harmonic scalpel, an advanced laparoscopic technique associated with less thermal damage in LC, when compared to electrocautery. METHODS: From October 2010 through June 2013, a total of 198 patients were randomly allocated to LC with a Harmonic scalpel (experimental group, 117 patients) or conventional monopolar electrocautery (control group, 81 patients). The main outcome measures were operative time, blood loss, conversion to laparotomy, postoperative hospital stay, post-LC pain, and cost effectiveness. RESULTS: The 2 groups were comparable with respect to baseline patient characteristics. When compared to conventional monopolar electrocautery, there were no significant reductions in the operative time, bleeding, frequency of conversion to laparotomy, and duration of postoperative recovery with the Harmonic scalpel (P > .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using conventional monopolar electrocautery is as effective and safe as that with the Harmonic scalpel, for treating uncomplicated cholecystitis and cholelithiasis. Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4978547/ /pubmed/27547026 http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2016.00037 Text en © 2016 by JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/), which permits for noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not altered in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Papers
Liao, Guanqun
Wen, Shunqian
Xie, Xueyi
Wu, Qing
Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy
title Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy
title_full Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy
title_fullStr Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy
title_full_unstemmed Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy
title_short Harmonic Scalpel versus Monopolar Electrocauterization in Cholecystectomy
title_sort harmonic scalpel versus monopolar electrocauterization in cholecystectomy
topic Scientific Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4978547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27547026
http://dx.doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2016.00037
work_keys_str_mv AT liaoguanqun harmonicscalpelversusmonopolarelectrocauterizationincholecystectomy
AT wenshunqian harmonicscalpelversusmonopolarelectrocauterizationincholecystectomy
AT xiexueyi harmonicscalpelversusmonopolarelectrocauterizationincholecystectomy
AT wuqing harmonicscalpelversusmonopolarelectrocauterizationincholecystectomy