Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
J Invest Surg ; 33(1): 59-66, 2020 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455005

ABSTRACT

Background: Bipolar sealing devices are routinely used to seal blood vessels. The aim of the study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of colonic sealing with the use of the bipolar energy devices in rats as model for experimental appendectomy. Methods: Seventy-five male Wistar rats underwent a cecal resection with four different bipolar sealing devices or a linear stapler. The harvesting procedure was performed immediately or at postoperative day (POD) 7. The sealing front bursting pressure (BP) was measured in both groups. At POD7, the resection line was clinically examined and the hydroxyproline (HDP) levels were determined. Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining was used for histopathological evaluation of the sealing front as well. Results: There was no mortality and no insufficiency. The BPs between the bipolar sealing devices showed no statistical differences. The early phase of the seal (POD 0) provides a low BP with an 30.8% increase until POD 7. The BPs in the stapler group showed significant better values. The hydroxyproline levels did not differ statistically between the groups. Histopathologically, there were more signs of ischemic necrosis in the stapler group than in the sealing devices groups. Conclusion: The resection and sealing of the cecum as an experimental appendectomy model with the use of bipolar energy devices proved feasible and safe in rats. The different energy devices in this study produce comparable results. To justify clinical practice in humans, several studies on the underlying mechanisms of early stage wound healing are needed.


Subject(s)
Appendectomy/instrumentation , Cecum/surgery , Electrocoagulation/instrumentation , Hemostasis, Surgical/instrumentation , Wound Closure Techniques/instrumentation , Animals , Appendectomy/adverse effects , Appendectomy/methods , Electrocoagulation/methods , Feasibility Studies , Hemostasis, Surgical/adverse effects , Hemostasis, Surgical/methods , Male , Models, Animal , Rats , Rats, Wistar , Surgical Staplers/adverse effects , Wound Closure Techniques/adverse effects
2.
Ann Surg ; 272(3): e257-e262, 2020 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1114943

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to provide a rapid synthesis of available data to identify the risk posed by utilizing surgical energy devices intraoperatively due to the generation of surgical smoke, an aerosol. Secondarily it aims to summarize methods to minimize potential risk to operating room staff. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Continuing operative practice during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic places the health of operating theatre staff at potential risk. SARS-CoV2 is transmitted through inhaled droplets and aerosol particles, thus posing an inhalation threat even at considerable distance. Surgical energy devices generate an aerosol of biological particular matter during use. The risk to healthcare staff through use of surgical energy devices is unknown. METHODS: This review was conducted utilizing a rapid review methodology to enable efficient generation and dissemination of information useful for concurrent clinical practice. RESULTS: There are conflicting stances on the use of energy devices and laparoscopy by different surgical governing bodies and societies. There is no definitive evidence that aerosol generated by energy devices may carry active SARS-CoV2 virus. However, investigations of other viruses have demonstrated aerosolization through energy devise use. Measures to reduce potential transmission include appropriate personal protective equipment, evacuation and filtration of surgical plume, limiting energy device use if appropriate, and adjusting endoscopic and laparoscopic practice (low CO2 pressures, evacuation through ultrafiltration systems). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of transmission of SARS-CoV2 through aerosolized surgical smoke associated with energy device use is not fully understood, however transmission is biologically plausible. Caution and appropriate measures to reduce risk to healthcare staff should be implemented when considering intraoperative use of energy devices.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Diathermy/instrumentation , Electrocoagulation/instrumentation , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans
3.
J Int Med Res ; 48(8): 300060520949772, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-742337

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to introduce an easy method of surgical smoke evacuation for patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 undergoing emergency surgery. METHODS: An easy, inexpensive, protective, and practical surgical smoke evacuation device/system was developed and is herein described. RESULTS: The use of this surgical smoke evacuation device/system in open surgery is convenient and effective. It allows for easy, economic, useful, and protective surgical smoke evacuation. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 infection causes direct mortality and morbidity, and its incidence has recently increased. Protection from electrosurgery-related smoke is recommended particularly during the current pandemic. This surgical smoke evacuation device/system is easy to use and provides a convenient and effective method of smoke evacuation during both open surgery and all cauterization interventions.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/surgery , Electrocoagulation/instrumentation , Electrosurgery/instrumentation , Pneumonia, Viral/surgery , Suction/instrumentation , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Electrocoagulation/methods , Electrosurgery/methods , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Smoke/prevention & control
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL