• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Detailed Analysis of Surgical Energy Use in a General Surgical Practice

Detailed Analysis of Surgical Energy Use in a General Surgical Practice

Andrea Limpuangthip, BA, Gyusung Lee, PhD, Ivan George, Adrian Park, MD. University of Maryland Medical Center

Introduction:
Advancing surgical technology has recently focused research on development of energy-based surgical devices that both minimize patient harm and maximize operating room efficiency. Laparoscopic surgeries commonly and significantly employ energy-based devices to cut, coagulate, or seal tissue with minimal blood loss. Despite the revolutionizing impact of energy devices, few investigations address their usage patterns. This study serves to define and characterize the consumption patterns of energy-based tissue cutting and cauterization/sealing devices used in laparoscopic procedures.

Methods:
In a general operative setting, we studied monopolar and ultrasonic devices, using a time-stamping protocol to record time activation and duration. Energy data was compiled from 46 laparoscopic procedures, performed by 5 highly experienced surgeons. Using perceived energy consumption, laparoscopic procedures were categorized as RYGB, hernia (inguinal, incisional, ventral), cholecystectomy, colectomy, PEH, and other (appendectomy, splenectomy, Heller myotomy). Using one-way ANOVA, we compared the mean total number of activations among surgeons.

Results:
Results derived from comparing activation times within a single category as performed by each experienced surgeon show little variation. Our finding that the total number of activations did not differ among participating surgeons (F(3,6)=0.085, p>0.05) indicates that this descriptive study serves as a reasonable representation of baseline energy use in a general operative setting. Furthermore, results show energy device usage varied depending on procedure. Energy devices were activated from an average low of 46.2 times in hernia procedures to an average high of 139.4 times in PEH repairs. With energy use duration, an average low of 84.3 seconds was found in cholecystectomies while PEH repairs implemented energy devices a total average high of 443.0 seconds. Average activation duration ranged from 1.5 seconds for cholecystectomy to 3.1 seconds for PEH. Amount of energy used compared with procedure length averaged a low of 2.2% per RYGB and a high of 6.9% for PEH.

Procedure #Times Activated Average Activation Duration (sec) Total Energy Use Duration (sec) Total Cut Duration (sec) Total Coag Duration (sec) %energy usage per procedure
RYGB 110.6 2.2 242.5 188.1 54.4 2.2
Hernia 46.2 2.8 145.2 28.4 116.8 2.8
Cholecystectomy 84.6 1.5 126.7 0 126.7 3.3
Colectomy 118.6 2.3 272.5 96.9 175.6 3.9
PEH 139.4 3.1 433 188 245 6.9
Other 123.3 2.8 313.7 81.6 232.1 5.9

Conclusion:
As the field of laparoscopic surgery continually advances, there is greater need for improving both application and efficacy of energy devices. The information our data yield serves as a basic, faithful representation of energy used in general surgical procedures. Predictably, energy use was comparable among representative surgeons but varied widely in terms of laparoscopic procedures. Acquiring even rudimentary data—such as which energy-based instruments are most often used and which procedures are most energy consumptive—sets the stage to amass even more valuable data concerning energy usage. Data collecting that concentrates on variance in use of energy devices on a procedure-by-procedure basis provides a foundation useful for studying workflow and ergonomic impacts. A starting point too is developed from which to undertake the crafting of specifications for new device refinements.


Session: Poster
Program Number: P190
View Poster

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals