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 journalArticlepeer-review

    4 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)
    Pages (from-to)59-62
    Number of pages4
    JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
    Issue number1
    StatePublished - Jul 2017


    • Colorectal surgery
    • Cost analysis
    • Laparoscopy

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Surgery


    Dive into the research topics of 'Reprocessed bipolar energy for laparoscopic colectomy: Is it worth it?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this