Comparison of two advanced bipolar tissue sealer/dividers for laparoscopic ovariectomy in dogs: articulating enseal G2 versus Ligasure Maryland device

Abstract

Abstract Background Advanced bipolar tissue sealer/dividers provide the most reliable and efficient means of tissue dissection and blood vessel sealing in laparoscopic surgery and the techniques are continuously improved. In veterinary practice, cost-effectiveness is of major impact, leading to re-use of instruments designed and sold for single use. Two high-end devices were evaluated and compared in a highly standardized laparoscopic ovariectomy procedure in dogs: The new generation Ligasure Maryland Sealer/Divider (LMSD) with improved atraumatic curved jaw shape for delicate tissue handling and dissection and non-stick nanocoating, and the new-generation Articulating Enseal G2 (AENG2) with several proclaimed features improving surgical performance, including articulation of the forceps tip; improved tissue compression during sealing; unique offset electrode configuration; and specific nanoparticle coating minimizing thermal spread and tissue sticking. Twenty-one client-owned dogs admitted for elective laparoscopic ovariectomy were randomly assigned to one of two groups: ovariectomy using AENG2 on the left ovary and LMSD in the right ovary or vice-versa. Procedural video recordings were used to assess ovarian ligament fat score, smoke formation, occurrence of bleeding, and excision duration. Excised tissues were examined histopathologically and collateral thermal damage was scored in three anatomic zones: suspensory ligament, vascular pedicle, and uterine junction. Tissue sealers were used repeatedly following standardized cleaning protocol with instrument washing machine and ethylene oxide gas sterilization and the number of uses until device failure was recorded. Results Excision times were significantly increased for AENG2 (median 01:35 min) compared to LMSD (median 01:00 min). Minor hemorrhage from incomplete sealing occurred in 3 sites in 2 patients (2x AENG2, 1x LMSD) and was not significantly different between groups. Smoke production as scored on videos and thermal tissue damage scores on histopathology also did not differ between AENG2 and LMSD. Both vessel sealers could be re-used repeatedly. Conclusion AENG2 provides a good alternative to LMSD in laparoscopic ovariectomy, with only minor differences in measured variables. Subjectively, the articulating feature of AENG2 did not improve surgical performance in laparoscopic ovariectomy and the use of LMSD appeared more straight-forward for this specific procedure. However, differences in operating these devices may be subject to personal preference.