Comparison of a reusable with a disposable vessel-sealing device in a sheep model: efficacy and costs.

OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of the new reusable vessel-sealing device MarSeal (KLS Martin, Tuttlingen, Germany) with the conventional standard disposable LigaSure device (Covidien-Valleylab, Boulder, CO) in an in vivo animal model. DESIGN Prospective animal study. SETTING Center of Experimental Surgery at a university hospital. ANIMALS Thirteen sheep. INTERVENTION(S) The carotid and femoral arteries were dissected bilaterally and sealed randomly with MarSeal unilaterally and consecutively with LigaSure contralaterally in vivo. Afterward the burst pressure was determined for each artery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Sealing time, failure rate, and burst pressure. RESULT(S) The mean diameter of all arteries sealed did not differ significantly between the two groups (MarSeal 5.40 mm vs. LigaSure 5.35 mm). The mean sealing time was significantly shorter with use of the reusable device (MarSeal 5.2 seconds vs. LigaSure 9.1 seconds). We did not find a significant difference in sealing failure rates between the groups (MarSeal 7.0% vs. LigaSure 9.1%). In addition, analysis of mean burst pressure did not reveal a significant difference between the different devices (MarSeal 429 mm Hg vs. LigaSure 484 mm Hg). There was no significant difference with respect to lateral thermal damage (MarSeal 0.91 cm vs. LigaSure 0.93 cm). CONCLUSION(S) In our in vivo animal study, the new reusable MarSeal device appears to be equivalently effective for vessel sealing when compared with the conventional disposable LigaSure device.