Skip to main content
Log in

Stray energy injury during robotic versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial

  • 2023 SAGES Oral
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Stray energy transfer from monopolar instruments during laparoscopic surgery is a recognized cause of potentially catastrophic complications. There are limited data on stray energy injuries in robotic surgery. We sought to characterize stray energy injury in the form of superficial burns to the skin surrounding laparoscopic and robotic trocar sites. Our hypothesis was that stray energy burns will occur at all laparoscopic and robotic port sites.

Methods

We conducted a prospective, randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing elective unilateral inguinal hernia repair at a VAMC over a 4-year period. Surgery was performed via transabdominal preperitoneal approach either laparoscopic-assisted (TAPP) or robotic-assisted (rTAPP). A monopolar scissor was used to deliver energy at 30W coagulation for all cases. At completion of the procedure, skin biopsies were taken from all the port sites. A picro-Sirius red stain was utilized to identify thermal injury by a blinded pathologist.

Results

Over half (54%, 59/108) of all samples demonstrated thermal injury to the skin. In the laparoscopic group, 49% (25/51) samples showed thermal injury vs. 60% (34/57) in the robotic group (p = 0.548). The camera port was the most frequently involved with 68% (13/19) rTAPP samples showing injury vs. 47% (8/17) in the TAPP group (p = 0.503). There was no difference in the rate of injury at the working port site (rTAPP 53%, 10/19 vs. TAPP 47%, 8/17; p = 0.991) or the assistant port site (rTAPP 58%, 11/19 vs. TAPP 53%, 9/17; p = 0.873).

Conclusions

Stray energy causes thermal injury to the skin at port sites in the majority robotic laparoscopic TAPP inguinal hernia repairs. There is no difference in stray energy transfer between the laparoscopic and robotic platform. This is the first study to confirm in-vivo transfer of stray energy during robotic surgical procedures. More study is needed to determine the clinical significance of these thermal injuries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Willson PD, Mcanena OJ, Peters EE (1994) A fatal complication of diathermy in laparoscopic surgery. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. https://doi.org/10.3109/13645709409152989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Guzman C, Forrester JA, Fuchshuber PR, Eakin JL (2019) Estimating the incidence of stray energy burns during laparoscopic surgery based on two statewide databases and retrospective rates: an opportunity to improve patient safety. Surg Technol Int. 34:30–34

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tucker RD (1995) Laparoscopic electrosurgical injuries: survey results and their implications. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5(4):311–317

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jones EL et al (2017) Stray energy transfer during endoscopy. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5427-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Overbey DM et al (2015) Surgical energy-based device injuries and fatalities reported to the Food and Drug Administration. J Am Coll Surg 221(1):197–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Townsend NT et al (2017) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery increases the risk of unintentional thermal injury from the monopolar. Surg Endosc 31:3146–3151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wikiel KJ et al (2021) Stray energy transfer in single-incision robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 35(6):2981–2985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wikiel KJ et al (2023) Robotic stray energy with constant-voltage versus constant-power regulating electrosurgical generators. Surg Endosc 37(1):580–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fuller A et al (2012) Electrosurgical injuries during robot assisted surgery: insights from the FDA MAUDE database. In: Proceedings of SPIE, vol 8207, p 820714

  10. Mendez-Probst CE et al (2011) Stray electrical currents in laparoscopic instruments used in da Vinci ® robot-assisted surgery: an in vitro study. J Endourol 25(9):1513–1517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Overbey DM et al (2021) Monopolar stray energy in robotic surgery. Surg Endosc 35(5):2084–2090

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jones EL et al (2013) Blend mode reduces unintended thermal injury by laparoscopic monopolar instruments: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 27(11):4016–4020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Asiyo-Vogel MN et al (1997) Histologic analysis of thermal effects of laser thermokeratoplasty and corneal ablation using Sirius-red polarization microscopy. J Cataract Refract Surg 23(4):515–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0886-3350(97)80208-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang J et al (2000) Laser irradiative tissue probed in situ by collagen 380-nm fluorescence imaging. Lasers Surg Med 27:158–164. https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-9101(2000)27:2%3c158::AID-LSM7%3e3.0.CO;2-I

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. The R Foundation - R: The R Project for Statistical Computing https://www.r-project.org/foundation

  16. Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, Gold J (1994) Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 47(11):1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(94)90129-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Charlson ME et al (2008) The Charlson comorbidity index is adapted to predict costs of chronic disease in primary care patients. J Clin Epidemiol 61(12):1234–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ek S, Meyer AC, Hedström M, Modig K (2022) Comorbidity and the association with 1-year mortality in hip fracture patients: can the ASA score and the Charlson Comorbidity Index be used interchangeably? Aging Clin Exp Res 34(1):129–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-021-01896-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Karacan T et al (2018) Comparison of the thermal spread of three different electrosurgical generators on rat uterus: a preliminary experimental study. Gynecol Obstet Invest 83(4):388–396. https://doi.org/10.1159/000488675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Montero PN et al (2010) Insulation failure in laparoscopic instruments. Surg Endosc 24(2):462–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Espada M, Munoz R, Noble BN et al (2011) Insulation failure in robotic and laparoscopic instrumentation: a prospective evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(2):121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jones EL, Mikami DJ (2018) Ch 19—Surgical energy. In: Fischer JE (ed) Fischer’s mastery of surgery, 7th edn. Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 273–282

    Google Scholar 

  23. Voyles CR, Tucker RD (1992) Education and engineering solutions for potential problems with laparoscopic monopolar electrosurgery. Am J Surg 164(1):57–62

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Robinson TN et al (2010) Surgeon-controlled factors that reduce monopolar electrosurgery capacitive coupling during laparoscopy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 20(5):317–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Robinson TN et al (2015) Separating the laparoscopic camera cord from the monopolar “bovie” cord reduces unintended thermal injury from antenna coupling: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 261(6):1056–1060. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hulka JF, Levy BS, Parker WH, Phillips JM (1997) Laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy: American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists’ 1995 Membership Survey. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 4:167–171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nduka CC, Super PA, Monson JR, Darzi AW (1994) Cause and prevention of electrosurgical injuries in laparoscopy. J Am Coll Surg 179:161–170

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Feldman LS et al (2012) FUSE (Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy™) Task Force. Surgeons don’t know what they don’t know about the safe use of energy in surgery. Surg Endosc 26(10):2735–2739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2263-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding was provided by Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Krzysztof J. Wikiel.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

This study was funded by SAGES Robotic Surgery Grant (2018). The authors, Drs. Wikiel, Bollinger, Montero, T. Jones, Robinson, and E. Jones have no other conflicts or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wikiel, K.J., Bollinger, D., Montero, P.M. et al. Stray energy injury during robotic versus laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 37, 8771–8777 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10331-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10331-3

Keywords

Navigation