Проспективное одноцентровое наблюдательное исследование энергетических устройств в колоректальной хирургии

1. Hotta T, Takifuji K, Yokoyama S, Matsuda K, et al. Literature review of the energy sources for performing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Jan 27;4(1):1–8. PMID: 22347536; PMCID: PMC3277876.

2. Campagnacci R, de Sanctis A, Baldarelli M, Rimini M, et al. Electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing device vs. ultrasonic coagulating shears in laparoscopic colectomies: a comparative study. Surg Endosc. 2007 Sep;21(9):1526–31. Epub 2007 Feb 8. PMID: 17287913.

3. Takada M, Ichihara T, Kuroda Y. Comparative study of electrothermal bipolar vessel sealer and ultrasonic coagulating shears in laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc. 2005 Feb;19(2):226–8. Epub 2004 Dec 2. PMID: 15573241.

4. Targarona EM, Balague C, Marin J, et al. Energy sources for laparoscopic colectomy: a prospective randomized comparison of conventional electrosurgery, bipolar computer-controlled electrosurgery and ultrasonic dissection. Operative outcome and costs analysis. Surg Innov. 2005 Dec;12(4):339–44.

5. Sista F, Abruzzese V, Schietroma M, et al. New Ultrasonic Scalpel versus Conventional Hemostasis in Right Colon Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Dig Surg. 1 March 2014;30(4-6):355–361.

6. Rimonda R, Arezzo A, Garrone, et al. Electrothermal Bipolar Vessel Sealing System vs. UltrasonicScalpel in Colorectal Laparoscopic Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized Study. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 52(4):p 657–661, April 2009. |

7. Kalari P, Nirhale DS, Vajja R, Galam P. Comparison of Conventional Bipolar Electrocautery and Ultrasonic Ultrasonic Scalpel in Colorectal Cancer Surgeries. Cureus. 2022 Mar 17;14(3):e23255. PMID: 35449609; PMCID: PMC9012577