Diathermy in laparoscopic surgery

O. Mcanena,P. Willson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/BJS.1800800905

1993-09-01

Abstract:The safety of monopolar radiofrequency electrical energy has been proven by 50 years of use during laparotomy. But how much do we know about diathermy and does its use differ in laparoscopic surgery? Alternating current, the type used for surgical diathermy, is characterized by power output (the rate of power delivered at a given time.) and frequency modulation. The latter refers to the number of changes in the direction of the current within 1 s and how this number changes over time. Empirically, it has been found that certain frequencies are more appropriate when cutting or coagulation is desired. ‘Polarity’ (monopolar versus bipolar) refers to the number of electrical poles at the site of application; the main difference is the distance between the poles. For monopolar, the second pole is the dispersive electrode plate, usually attached to the patient’s thigh. In bipolar mode, the distance between the poles is a few millimetres and the current affects only the tissue located between these poles. Relatively low power is needed in bipolar mode; up to ten times more is required in monopolar mode because the body is a poor electrical conductor. The relatively low power of bipolar diathermy is insufficient to obtain the power density required to cut tissue. This power density is the key element that determines the thermodynamic effect. In general, a highly concentrated electrical field leads to vaporization (cutting) of tissue and a more dispersed field results in coagulation. It is possible to manipulate this bioeffect of electrical current only in the monopolar mode, although recent advances in bipolar technology may have overcome this problem’. Changing between, or combining, cutting and coagulation is usually achieved via a switch on the diathermy machine, but the surgeon may change the contact area at the point of dissection to convert a high-power ‘cutting’ output to ‘coagulation’ by holding, for example, a forceps between diathermy instrument and tissue, thereby reducing the power density. Monopolar electrical energy is the most frequently used method of dissection in laparoscopic surgery today. Lasers have been readily adapted to laparoscopic surgery but have no proven safety benefit over the less expensive and more freely available electrocautery systems2. Laser dissection methods rely on the ability of light energy to excite molecules sufficient to cause heating of the recipient tissue and disruption of structural proteins3. Carbon dioxide laser dissection, in particular, has an inherent ‘backstop effect’ that is difficult to control and may lead to inadvertent damage of structures adjacent to the area of intended coagulation4. Newer technology using the neodymium yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser with contact tips has eliminated the danger of a free beam loose in a body cavity, but energy penetrates deeply (3-4 mm) and may injure adjacent tissue inadvertently. The potential problems associated with the laparoscopic use of monopolar electrocoagulation are not fully appreciated5. They relate to unrecognized energy transfer (‘stray current’) outside the view of the laparoscope. During laparoscopic surgery electrical energy is passed through the abdominal wall via cannulas (which themselves may or may not be conductors) by instruments (which may or may not be adequately insulated) to tissues being dissected. ‘The only part of this circuit that is visible is the tissue being dissected. Potential areas for concern include insulation breaks, induced currents between a correctly insulated instrument and its surrounding cannula (capacitative coupling), unintended contact with other metal instruments within the abdomen (direct coupling), energy transfer through tissue from the point of dissection, and arcing (sparking) to local structures from a dissecting electrode that has been activated but is not in contact with the body. Therefore, electrical injury remote from the site of surgery may occur as a result of tissue conduction, discharge of induced capacitative coupled current, and high-voltage sparking. Hunter’, and Voyles and Tucker5 recently addressed the problems of stray current outside the view of the laparoscope. Insulation defects, although frequently not visually perceptible, may lead to near 100 per cent delivery of electrical energy at a site beylond the view of the laparoscope. The hazard of insulation failure depends on the location of the point of failure along the instrument. If in the handle, it may cause a shock to the surgeon. If outside the view of the camera, thermal injury may occur to any viscus in contact with the defective instrument. If it occurs within the metal cannula, the only evidence may be interference with the electrosurgical generator, jerking of the abdominal wall, or interference with the video monitor. This may be harmless as the current is dissipated