Vascular pedicle ligation techniques during laparoscopic colectomy. A prospective randomized trial. Ultrasonic versus standard electric dissection in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing system vs. harmonic scalpel in colorectal laparoscopic surgery: a prospective, randomized study. Energy sources for laparoscopic colectomy: a prospective randomized comparison of conventional electrosurgery, bipolar computer-controlled electrosurgery and ultrasonic dissection. Operative outcome and costs analysis. Prospective randomized study of monopolar scissors, bipolar vessel sealer and ultrasonic shears in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. A prospective randomized comparison of two instruments for dissection and vessel sealing in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
A variety of devices are available for pedicle ligation during laparoscopic colectomy including vascular staplers, clips, and electrothermal bipolar vessel-sealing devices. This study assesses their speed, reliability, and cost to guide surgeons in their choice for intracorporeal pedicle ligation.
                A prospective randomized study comparing laparoscopic vascular staplers and disposable clip appliers (S/C) with the LigaSure Atlas (LIG) was performed during elective right, left, and total colectomy. Cases were stratified by procedure. Failure was defined as any bleeding after proper pedicle ligation.
                The study included 48 S/C patients and 52 LIG patients with no differences in demographics, diagnosis, procedure, number of vessels ligated per procedure, or operative time. Failure occurred for 14 (9.2%) of the 152 vessels ligated in the S/C group, as compared with 5 (3%) of the 169 vessels ligated in the LIG group (p = 0.02). The median blood loss associated with device failure was 50 ml (range, 20-50 ml) in S/C group, as compared with 100 ml (range 25-800 ml) in the LIG group (p = 0.054). Major blood loss attributable to device failure and surgeon error occurred in only one LIG case. The mean cost per case of vessel ligation was significantly less in the LIG group (317 dollars +/- 0 dollars vs 400 dollars +/- 112 dollars; p < 0.001). The cost differences were greatest for total colectomy (LIG = 317 dollars +/- 0 dollars vs S/C = 565 dollars +/- 67 dollars; p = 0.002).
                Device failure, although more common in the S/C group, does not result in significant blood loss. The LigaSure Atlas is more cost effective during laparoscopic colectomy, especially total colectomy, and may allow the surgeon more versatility in its application. To assess the safety and efficacy of the ultrasonic dissection (UC) compared with standard electrosurgery (ES) in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
                High-frequency ultrasound energy was introduced in laparoscopic surgery to improve dissection and coagulation. Very limited data have been published on its use in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
                Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic right or left hemicolectomy (RH and LH), sigmoidectomy (SG), or low anterior resection (LAR) were randomized to either UC or ES. The following data were collected and analyzed: preoperative data (individual patient data, indication for surgery), intraoperative data (conversion to open surgery, conversion ES to UC, operative time, blood loss, complication rate), and postoperative data (morbidity and mortality, volume of drainage, hospital stay).
                Between January 2002 and December 2003, 171 patients underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resection. Twenty-5 patients did not satisfy the inclusion criteria and were excluded. The diagnosis of the remaining 146 patients was diverticulitis (44), colonic adenoma (31), adenocarcinoma (70), or epidermoid carcinoma (1). These patients underwent laparoscopic RH (28), LH (31), SG (47), or LAR (40). There were no differences in preoperative data. The overall conversion rate to open surgery was 11.6%, with no differences between the two groups; 20.8% undergoing ES were converted to UC, more frequently during right hemicolectomy or low anterior resection. Operative time, the primary endpoint of this study, did not differ between the two groups: UC 93 minutes versus ES 102.6 minutes (P = 0.46). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in UC 140.8 mL versus ES 182.6 mL (P = 0.032). No differences were observed in postoperative morbidity or other preoperative or postoperative parameters.
                UC is a useful device in laparoscopic colorectal surgery that facilitates completion of difficult cases and reduces intraoperative blood loss. Nevertheless, the majority of laparoscopic procedures can be completed with ES. Therefore, selective use of UC appears to be the most cost-effective policy. This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed with the aid of LigaSure vessel-sealing system or Ultracision.
                Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic right or left hemicolectomy or anterior resection of rectum were randomly assigned to either the use of Ligasure or Ultracision. The primary end point was intraoperative reduction of blood loss. Secondary end points were intraoperative and postoperative morbidity and operative time.
                Between April 2005 and December 2006, 140 consecutive patients were included in the study (70 Ligasure and 70 Ultracision. We performed 31 right hemicolectomies, 69 left hemicolectomies, and 40 anterior resections of rectum. Blood loss was 109.6 ml (Ultracision 107.9 ml vs. Ligasure 111.2 ml, P value = 0.72). Intraoperative complication rate was 2.8 percent (Ultracision 1.4 percent vs. Ligasure 4.2 percent, P value < 0.01). Postoperative mortality was 0.7 percent. The overall conversion rate was 7.8 percent, 6 in the Ligasure group and 5 in the Ultracision group (P value = 0.09). Operative time, considered from pneumoperitoneum to minilaparotomy, was 115.7 minutes (Ultracision 114.8 minutes vs. Ligasure 116.3 minutes, P value = 0.89).
                Results showed that Ligasure and Ultracision are both useful instruments for laparoscopic colorectal surgery with no significant difference in terms of intraoperative/postoperative morbidity and operative time. Choice of which technique to perform should be according to the surgeon's preference. The development of operative laparoscopic surgery is linked to advances in ancillary surgical instrumentation. Ultrasonic energy devices avoid the use of electricity and provide effective control of small- to medium-sized vessels. Bipolar computer-controlled electrosurgical technology eliminates the disadvantages of electrical energy, and a mechanical blade adds a cutting action. This instrument can provide effective hemostasis of large vessels up to 7 mm. Such devices significantly increase the cost of laparoscopic procedures, however, and the amount of evidence-based information on this topic is surprisingly scarce. This study compared the effectiveness of three different energy sources on the laparoscopic performance of a left colectomy. The trial included 38 nonselected patients with a disease of the colon requiring an elective segmental left-sided colon resection. Patients were preoperatively randomized into three groups. Group I had electrosurgery; vascular dissection was performed entirely with an electrosurgery generator, and vessels were controlled with clips. Group II underwent computer-controlled bipolar electrosurgery; vascular and mesocolon section was completed by using the 10-mm Ligasure device alone. In group III, 5-mm ultrasonic shears (Harmonic Scalpel) were used for bowel dissection, vascular pedicle dissection, and mesocolon transection. The mesenteric vessel pedicle was controlled with an endostapler. Demographics (age, sex, body mass index, comorbidity, previous surgery and diagnoses requiring surgery) were recorded, as were surgical details (operative time, conversion, blood loss), additional disposable instruments (number of trocars, EndoGIA charges, and clip appliers), and clinical outcome. Intraoperative economic costs were also evaluated. End points of the trial were operative time and intraoperative blood loss, and an intention-to-treat principle was followed. The three groups were well matched for demographic and pathologic features. Surgical time was significantly longer in patients operated on with conventional electrosurgery vs the Harmonic Scalpel or computed-based bipolar energy devices. This finding correlated with a significant reduction in intraoperative blood loss. Conversion to other endoscopic techniques was more frequent in Group I; however, conversion to open surgery was similar in all three groups. No intraoperative accident related to the use of the specific device was observed in any group. Immediate outcome was similar in the three groups, without differences in morbidity, mortality, or hospital stay. Analysis of operative costs showed no significant differences between the three groups. High-energy power sources specifically adapted for endoscopic surgery reduce operative time and blood loss and may be considered cost-effective when left colectomy is used as a model. Many instruments are used for laparoscopic dissection, including monopolar electrosurgery scissors (MES), electrothermal bipolar vessel sealers (BVS) and ultrasonically coagulating shears (UCS). These three devices were compared with regard to dissection time, blood loss, safety and costs.
                Sixty-one consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic left-sided colectomy were randomized to MES, BVS or UCS. The primary endpoint was dissection time.
                Patient and operation characteristics did not differ between the groups. Median dissection time was significantly shorter with BVS (105 min) and UCS (90 min) than with MES (137 min) (P < 0.001). With BVS and UCS, significantly fewer additional clips were required (MES 9 versus BVS 0 versus UCS 3; P < 0.001) and there was a trend towards lower blood loss (125 versus 50 versus 50 ml respectively; P = 0.223) and a reduced volume of suction fluid (425 versus 80 versus 110 ml; P = 0.058). Overall satisfaction was similar for the three instruments. Dissection with BVS and UCS was significantly cheaper than with MES, assuming a centre volume of 200 cases per year (P = 0.009).
                BVS and UCS shorten dissection time in laparoscopic left-sided colectomy and are cost-effective compared with MES. A newly available, laparoscopic 5-mm bipolar vessel sealing device promises substantial advantages over the 10-mm instrument. This study compared the safety as well as the technical and surgical aspects of these different tools.
                For this study, 30 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic left-sided colectomy were prospectively randomized for the 5-mm LigaSure or The 10-mm LigaSure. The patients' demographics were analyzed together with their intraoperative and postoperative parameters, and the instruments were assessed by the surgeons with a standardized questionnaire.
                The two groups were comparable and demonstrated similar mean operation times, blood losses, and hospital stays. The 5-mm LigaSure was applied in more operation steps and resulted in fewer bleeding episodes and less lens cleaning. Monopolar scissors were used less frequently in the 5-mm group, thus minimizing cauteric lesions and their complications (0 in the 5-mm group vs 2 in the 10-mm group). Overall satisfaction with the 5-mm LigaSure was significantly higher (8.4 +/- 0.18 vs 6.9 +/- 0.41 out of 10; p = 0.002), with significant advantages in terms of dissection capacity, visibility, and handling.
                The 5-mm LigaSure is as secure and fast as the larger 10-mm device and compares favorably in terms of finer dissection as well as trocar flexibility and handling. Therefore, it can be used safely in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
The limitations of this review is the small number of trials and heterogeneity of the studies included. With the current evidence it is not possible to demonstrate which is the best instrument in laparoscopic colectomy. Hopefully more data would follow and subsequent updates of this review could become more informative.