PlasmaBlade versus Electrocautery for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Harvesting in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Clinical Outcome Study

(1) Background: DIEP-based breast reconstruction necessitates wide undermining at the abdominal donor site, creating large wound areas. Flap harvesting is usually conducted using electrosurgical dissection devices. This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes in patients after using the PEAK PlasmaBlade (PPB) versus monopolar electrocautery (MPE). (2) Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 128 patients with DIEP-based breast reconstruction. Patient characteristics and information on the postoperative course were collected and a comparative evaluation was conducted. (3) Results: The MPE group exhibited significantly (p* = 0.0324) higher abdominal drainage volume (351.11 ± 185.96 mL) compared to the PPB group (279.38 ± 183.38 mL). A subgroup analysis demonstrated that PPB significantly reduced postoperative wound fluid in patients with BMI > 30 kg/m2 (p* = 0.0284), without prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p** = 0.0041), and among non-smokers (p = 0.0046). Furthermore, postoperative pain was significantly (p**** < 0.0001) lower in the PPB cohort. (4) Conclusions: This study confirms the non-inferiority of the PEAK PlasmaBlade to conventional electrocautery for abdominal flap harvesting. The PPB demonstrated advantages, notably reduced drainage volume and lower postoperative pain levels. Recognizing patient subsets that benefit more from the PPB highlights the importance of personalized device selection based on patient characteristics.

Use of PEAK PlasmaBlade in implant-based breast reconstruction and radiotherapy: new strategy to reduce complications

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction in the setting of radiotherapy often leads to higher complications rates (mainly capsular contracture and wound dehiscence) and poor cosmetic outcomes. We hypothesized that the combination of pulsed-electron avalanche knife (PEAK) PlasmaBlade (a pulsed radiofrequency electrosurgery) and acellular dermal matrix Veritas® in postmastectomy radiotherapy implant-based breast reconstruction could result in lower complications rate, better reconstructive results, and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

A prospective observational study focused on the use of PEAK PlasmaBlade in implant-based breast reconstruction and radiotherapy was carried out in the Plastic Reconstructive Surgery Unit at Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori Milano between December 2017 and 2019 (2017-2018: enrollment; 2018-2019: follow-up). Patient demographics were queried and complication rates and patient and surgeon satisfaction were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 88 patients were enrolled; 2 patients received bilateral reconstruction, leading to a total of 90 procedures. Sixty-two women received contralateral symmetrization. Seroma was the most frequent minor complication (8.8%); implant exposure was the most recorded among major complications (5.5%). Preoperative lipofilling was the most substantial protective factor for preventing complications (p < 0.001). A significant association between capsular thermal damage thickness and the type of electrosurgery used (traditional electrosurgery vs PEAK PlasmaBlade) was observed, with lower values with PEAK PlasmaBlade (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our protocol results in low rates of surgical complications and a high level of patient and surgeon satisfaction although longer follow-up is needed.

Effect of low-thermal dissection device versus conventional electrocautery in mastectomy for female-to-male transgender patients

Subcutaneous mastectomy, the first step in sexual reassignment surgery of female-to-male transsexuals, is associated with high rates of complication and revision surgery. Also, conventional electrosurgery and the associated thermal tissue damage may compromise outcome. This retrospective randomised clinical study evaluated the effect of low-thermal plasma dissection device (PEAK PlasmaBlade, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) in comparison with conventional electrosurgery. A total of 17 female-to-male transsexuals undergoing mastectomy were randomised to PEAK PlasmaBlade on one breast side and to monopolar electrosurgery on the other side of the same patient. Wounds of 17 patients were examined histologically for acute thermal injury. Significantly less total volume of drain output (58.8 ± 37.4 mL vs 98.5 ± 76.4 mL; P = .012) was found on the PEAK PlasmaBlade side compared with the electrosurgery side. Duration of drain was significantly shorter on the PEAK PlasmaBlade side (2.5 ± 0.7 days vs 3.2 ± 0.6 days; P = .010). Furthermore, the PEAK PlasmaBlade side showed fewer thermal damages (41.2% vs 82.4%; P = .039) and thermal injury depth from PEAK PlasmaBlade side was less (3170 vs 4060 μm). PEAK PlasmaBlade appears to be superior to monopolar electrosurgery for mastectomy in female-to-male transsexuals, because it demonstrated less thermal tissue damage, less total volume of drain output, and shorter duration of drain, resulting in faster wound healing.

Comparative analysis on the effect of low-thermal plasma dissection device (PEAK PlasmaBlade) vs conventional electrosurgery in post-bariatric abdominoplasty: A retrospective randomised clinical study

Post-bariatric patients undergoing abdominoplasty have a relatively high risk of complications due to residual obesity and major comorbidities. Also, conventional electrosurgery and the associated thermal tissue damage may compromise outcomes. This retrospective randomised clinical study evaluated the effect of low-thermal plasma dissection device (PEAK [pulsed electron avalanche knife] PlasmaBlade) in comparison with conventional electrosurgery. A total of 52 post-bariatric patients undergoing abdominoplasty were randomised to PEAK PlasmaBlade (n = 26) and to monopolar electrosurgery (n = 26). Wounds of 20 patients per group were examined histologically for acute thermal injury depth. In PEAK PlasmaBlade incisions, acute thermal damage was significantly reduced compared with standard of care (40% vs 75%; P = .035). Also, acute thermal injury depth from PEAK PlasmaBlade was less than that from electrosurgery (2780 μm vs 4090 μm). Significantly less total complication rate (30.8% vs 69.2%; P = .012) was found by PEAK PlasmaBlade compared with electrosurgery. Moreover, the PEAK PlasmaBlade showed less than half as many wound healing problems (19.2% vs 46.2%; P = .075), far fewer secondary bleeding (7.7% vs 30.8%; P = .075), and no seroma compared with four seroma with the standard of care (0% vs 15.4%; P = .11). PEAK PlasmaBlade appears to be superior to traditional monopolar electrosurgery for post-bariatric abdominoplasty, because it demonstrated significantly less tissue damage, less total complication rate, and fewer postoperative seroma resulting in faster wound healing.

Comparative analysis on the effect of low-thermal plasma dissection device (PEAK PlasmaBlade) versus conventional electro surgery in post-bariatric body-contouring procedures: A retrospective randomised clinical study

Postoperative wound-healing problems are relatively high in post-bariatric body-contouring procedures, partly because of electrosurgery and the associated thermal tissue damage. This study is a retrospective randomised evaluation of the effect of a low-thermal plasma dissection device (PEAK PlasmaBlade, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) in comparison with conventional electrosurgery. A total of 24 patients undergoing upper arm or medial thigh lifting were randomised to PEAK PlasmaBlade on one side and to monopolar electrosurgery on the other side of the same patient. Wounds of 10 patients were examined histologically for acute thermal injury depth. Significantly lower total volume of drain output (61,1 ± 70,2 mL versus 95,1 ± 176,0 mL; P = .04) was found on the PEAK PlasmaBlade side compared with the electrosurgery side. Furthermore, the PEAK PlasmaBlade side showed fewer seromas (no case of seroma versus three seromas in the electrosurgery group) and less thermal damage (40% versus 70%; P = .26). Acute thermal injury depth from the PEAK PlasmaBlade was less than from monopolar electrosurgery (425 ± 171 μm versus 686 ± 1037 μm; P = .631). PEAK PlasmaBlade appears to be superior to traditional monopolar electrosurgery for post-bariatric body-contouring procedures because it demonstrated less tissue damage, lower total volume of drain output, and fewer postoperative seromas resulting in faster wound healing.

PEAK PlasmaBlade versus monopolar electrocautery tonsillectomy in adults: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and compare postoperative pain and recovery following PEAK PlasmaBlade and monopolar electrocautery tonsillectomy in adults.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients were recruited and randomized into 2 groups: PEAK PlasmaBlade (n = 29) or monopolar electrocautery (n = 29) tonsillectomy. Postoperative pain, complications, patient satisfaction, number of tablets of analgesia taken and days taken to return to soft diet, normal diet, normal activities and achieve pain-free swallowing were compared and analysed, with the aid of a pain diary given to patients. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 13.0 with statistical significance set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Patients in the PEAK PlasmaBlade group were able to achieve pain-free swallowing in a shorter time compared to the electrocautery group (13.28 versus 15.76 days, P = 0.035). Patients were also more satisfied with PEAK PlasmaBlade tonsillectomy (P = 0.046). No significant differences in the incidence of postoperative haemorrhage, daily visual analog score for pain, number of tablets of analgesia taken and time taken to return to soft diet, normal diet and activities were seen for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that PEAK PlasmaBlade tonsillectomy has a faster recovery period in terms of time taken to achieve pain-free swallowing and may offer advantages when compared to monopolar electrocautery tonsillectomy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b.

An electrical plasma dissection tool for surgical treatment of chronic ulcers: Results of a prospective randomised trial

Cutaneous ulceration is a difficult medical problem and a major source of morbidity for patients. In the surgical treatment of ulcers, debridement is the first step, and it can be carried out using several surgical tools. Recently, new surgical devices have emerged using plasma-mediated electrical discharges with a lower peak temperature. A prospective single-blind trial was conducted on chronic ulcers not responsive to common non-surgical management. Patients were randomly separated into 2 groups: Group A received surgical debridement with conventional electrocautery, and Group B received surgical debridement using the plasma-mediated device. Histological samples were collected intraoperatively to evaluate the thermal damage during the surgical procedure and 2 weeks after surgery to evaluate the inflammatory response and collagen deposition. The width of coagulation necrosis at the incision margins in Group B was significantly shorter compared with Group A (P = .001). The inflammatory cell infiltration showed a cellular distribution percentage that was quite equal between the 2 groups. The granulation tissue showed an abundant deposition of dense and mature collagen in Group B, compared with Group A, where the mature collagen appeared in small quantities (P < .001). Microbial culture showed a lower incidence of postoperative infections in Group B compared with the control group (P < .05). The study demonstrated, based on the results, that the new technology with the use of a lower temperature electrosurgical device represents an effective therapeutic weapon for the surgical treatment of skin ulcers, both vascular and extravascular types.