Evidence Hub

Outcomes of conventional and advanced energy devices in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review

Melissa Abi Antoun, A. Etrusco, V. Chiantera, A. S. Laganà, E. Feghali, A. Khazzaka, G. Stabile, L. Della Corte et al.

MITAT. Minimally invasive therapy & allied technologies, 2024

35 citations

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Hemostasis is an important step in all surgical procedures. Mechanical methods of hemostasis have been gradually abandoned in favor of electrosurgery. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of electrosurgical instruments utilized in minimally invasive gynecological procedures. Material and methods We performed a systematic review, including randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies, comparing the outcomes of different energy devices (EDs) used in laparoscopic gynecologic surgeries. We extracted data about blood loss (BL), mean operative time, post-operative pain, hospital stay and complications associated with each electrosurgical device. Results We included 30 studies reporting comparative outcomes concerning conventional (bipolar and monopolar) and innovative EDs (Harmonic scalpel, LigaSure, Plasma kinetic gyrus, Thunderbeat, EnSeal, Marseal, Caiman and ALAN). New EDs were found to be more efficient in complex surgeries due to less intraoperative BL and shorter operative time. No significant decrease in hospital stay, post-operative pain or complications was found with the use of new energy instruments. Conclusions Although new electrosurgical devices seem an appealing and safer option, there is still insufficient evidence for one vessel-sealing technology to be considered superior to another. Therefore, monopolar and conventional bipolar (CB) are still widely used in laparoscopic gynecology.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free