Evaluation of an Innovative, Cordless Ultrasonic Dissector

Abstract

Ultrasonic thermal energy is commonly used for dissection and vessel ligation. This study compared HARMONIC ACE and Sonicision Cordless Ultrasonic Dissector (SCUD). The devices were used in an in vivo porcine model to coagulate 189 arteries up to 5 mm. Seal times were similar: SCUD, 5.2 ± 1.7 s; ACE, 4.9 ± 1.5 s (P = .20). Burst pressures for SCUD and AVE were 578 ± 284 and 605 ± 288 mm Hg, respectively (P = .48). Stratification by vessel diameter yielded similar results. In all, 17 applications resulted in seal failure on either the proximal or distal side, with no difference between SCUD (4.4%) and ACE (6.6%; P = .37). Histological examination of 48 specimens showed similar thermal spreads: 1.06 ± 0.05 versus 1.08 ± 0.05 mm for SCUD and ACE, respectively (P = .82). In 41 timed mesenteric transections, SCUD required 24.8 ± 4.9 s, which was significantly less than the 33.8 ± 5.4 s for ACE (P < .0001), with no bleeding in either group. SCUD and ACE showed similar vessel seal times, burst pressures, thermal spreads, and seal failure rates. SCUD was more efficient than ACE in mesenteric transection.

Cordless ultrasonic dissector versus advanced bipolar vessel sealing device for laparoscopic ovariectomy in dogs*

“…Apart from being cordless and allowing freedom of movement during surgery, the major advantage of the SCUD is the reduced cost compared to more high‐end endoscopic sealing devices. The SCUD performed similarly to the Harmonic ACE for vessel sealing times, burst pressures, collateral thermal damage, and seal failure rates in vivo in pigs . The SCUD had significantly decreased surgical smoke production compared to Harmonic ACE in ex vivo studies .…”

“…Consequently, there is a demand for more economical laparoscopic vessel sealing solutions. Recently, the Sonicision (Covidien) cordless ultrasonic dissector (SCUD) was marketed . The SCUD is the first cordless energy‐based hemostatic device for laparoscopic tissue dissection and vessel sealing.…”

Clinical Use of a Cordless Laparoscopic Ultrasonic Device

“…3,9 We saw no iatrogenic injury to proximal tissue when using the device. The visual obstruction from plume by these devices also varies.…”

Postmarketing Analysis of a Novel, Cordless Ultrasonic Dissector

“…An in vivo porcine animal model demonstrated promising results as to the effectiveness of this device in ligating vessels and dividing tissue with increased efficiency as compared with another commercially available ultrasonic dissector. 1 A second preclinical study focusing on the emissivity and temperature profile of the passive and active jaws of ultrasonic devices found that Sonicision improves tissues cutting by heating the active blade hotter as compared to other commercially available devices. 9 Finally, a summary of available studies regarding quantification of surgical plume which may obstruct visualization of the operating field in laparoscopic surgery has determined that Sonicision has a low rate of visualization obstruction (4.8%).…”