الفهرس 
INTRODUCTION AND AIM OF WORK
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 234 |  |  |
| | | from | 234 | | |
Abstract
This is a prospective non-randomized study that compares ultrasonic-dissector to ultrasonic-coagulation-shears in the setting of elective liver resection that has been conducted on 143 cases (84 and 59 cases in each arm respectively).
Results show that there is no difference between the two instruments of transection in most aspects compared, specially the blood loss, speed of transection, identification of intraoperative intra-parenchymal anatomical landmarks, injury to remnant liver, incidence of complications and mortality rate. Ultrasonic dissector is favoured for anatomical and major resections and ultrasonic-coagulation-shears is preferred in non-anatomical and minor resections.
Conclusions:
This study confirms that both instruments of transection can be used safely in elective liver resection.
Recommendations:
Based on the study results, it is not possible to recommend any of these two instruments over the other. As both can be utilized safely in liver transection, it is up to the surgeon to choose the instrument that suits him better based upon non-patient related parameters as ergonomics and cost.
Further large scale multicenter, multinational randomized controlled studies that include all the common instruments utilized in liver transection and including the clamp-crushing technique are intensely required to objectively compare instrument that have been already introduced into the surgical practice. Results of these studies are not necessarily expected to show superiority of a single instrument over the others. Evidence of equal competence is an outcome that has to be scientifically proven.