Acute Effects of Ultrasonic Shears and Monopolar Electrosurgery on Sciatic Nerve Electrophysiology.

Background: When using energized surgical devices in the vicinity of nerves, care must be taken to reduce the risk of thermal or electrical injury. For example, during thyroidectomy, it is critical to avoid damage to the recurrent laryngeal nerve while dissecting and coagulating nearby tissue. Methods: We compared use of Harmonic ACE+ and Focus ultrasonic shears and monopolar electrosurgery to scissors as a control applied to make incisions in muscle 2 mm from the sciatic nerve in rats. Via electrophysiological monitoring, the compound action potential and conduction velocity were determined over a three hour post-application period. Neuromuscular response was observed by von Frey hair stimulation. Leukocyte infiltration was measured via HE BJMMR, 14(12): 1-8, 2016; Article no.BJMMR.25233 2 than scissors, although electrosurgery exhibited prolonged depolarization and repolarization times. Electrosurgery had significantly slower conduction velocity and increased von Frey stimulation force compared to scissors, whereas both ultrasonic devices were not different from the control. No difference was observed between devices for leukocyte infiltration, but electrosurgery had significantly greater β-APP levels than scissors, while again ultrasonic devices were not different. Conclusion: Electrosurgery caused significantly more neurophysiological damage than scissors. In contrast, the ultrasonic shears were not statistically different than scissors in terms of nerve injury. Harmonic ACE+ and Focus can be used to cut and coagulate tissue near nerves with a low risk of electrophysiological injury.

[1]  Chaoyang Chen,et al.  Acute and subacute effects of the ultrasonic blade and electrosurgery on nerve physiology , 2015, British journal of neurosurgery.

[2]  Joseph F. Amaral,et al.  Ex vivo and in vivo evaluation of an ultrasonic device for precise dissection, coagulation, and transection , 2014 .

[3]  Joseph F. Amaral,et al.  Sealing vessels up to 7 mm in diameter solely with ultrasonic technology , 2014, Medical devices.

[4]  M. Büchler,et al.  ENERgized vessel sealing systems versus CONventional hemostasis techniques in thyroid surgery—the ENERCON systematic review and network meta-analysis , 2013, Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.

[5]  S. Burgess,et al.  Ultrasonic Incisions Produce Less Inflammatory Mediator Response during Early Healing than Electrosurgical Incisions , 2013, PloS one.

[6]  J. Clymer,et al.  Tissue effects in vessel sealing and transection from an ultrasonic device with more intelligent control of energy delivery , 2013, Medical devices.

[7]  Jeffrey W. Clymer,et al.  Comparison of two ultrasonic coagulating shears in sealing pulmonary vessels , 2013 .

[8]  Chaoyang Chen,et al.  The effects of ultrasonic and electrosurgery devices on nerve physiology , 2012, British journal of neurosurgery.

[9]  J. Huard,et al.  Use of an ultrasonic blade facilitates muscle repair after incision injury. , 2011, The Journal of surgical research.

[10]  H. Stills,et al.  Healing of Iatrogenic Skeletal Muscle Wounds Is Affected by Incision Device , 2010, Surgical innovation.

[11]  G. Theophilidis,et al.  The effects of oxaliplatin, an anticancer drug, on potassium channels of the peripheral myelinated nerve fibres of the adult rat. , 2008, Neurotoxicology.

[12]  S. Lindström,et al.  Comparison of experimental nerve injury caused by ultrasonically activated scalpel and electrosurgery , 2005, The British journal of surgery.

[13]  Y. Zohar,et al.  Ultrastructural Study of Peripheral Nerve Injury Induced by Monopolar and Bipolar Diathermy , 1996, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[14]  Amaral Jf The experimental development of an ultrasonically activated scalpel for laparoscopic use. , 1994 .

[15]  J. Amaral The experimental development of an ultrasonically activated scalpel for laparoscopic use. , 1994, Surgical laparoscopy & endoscopy.