Reprocessed bipolar energy for laparoscopic colectomy: Is it worth it?

Justin T. Brady, Avinash Bhakta, Scott R. Steele, Joseph A. Trunzo, Anthony J. Senagore, Krista Holmgren, Anthony Schillero, Bradley J. Champagne

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    2 Scopus citations


    Background: Reprocessed (re-sterilized) bipolar energy devices represent one effort to reduce operative costs. Methods: Between January 2014 to October 2015, 76 patients underwent laparoscopic colectomy using a reprocessed bipolar energy device and were case-matched to 76 patients from a prospectively-maintained database from November 2012 to December 2013 when an identical, new device was used. Outcomes included reprocessed device safety, efficiency and hospital costs. Results: There was no difference in patient demographics, operative times or failed pedicle ligation requiring intervention between groups (all P > 0.05). In 19.7% of reprocessed cases, the surgeon opened an additional new device after dissatisfaction with the reprocessed instrument. Operating room costs and total costs were less for the reprocessed device group (all P < 0.05). Conclusion: Reprocessed bipolar energy devices were associated with savings in operative expenses, however, larger studies are warranted due to the high surgeon dissatisfaction regarding safety concerns with the reprocessed equipment.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
    StateAccepted/In press - Oct 4 2016



    • Colorectal surgery
    • Cost analysis
    • Laparoscopy

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Surgery

    Cite this

    Brady, J. T., Bhakta, A., Steele, S. R., Trunzo, J. A., Senagore, A. J., Holmgren, K., Schillero, A., & Champagne, B. J. (Accepted/In press). Reprocessed bipolar energy for laparoscopic colectomy: Is it worth it? American Journal of Surgery.