2014 40th Annual Northeast Bioengineering Conference (NEBEC) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/nebec.2014.6972838
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Isolated electrocautery device eliminates electrical interference and surgical burns

Abstract: In the 51 million invasive surgeries performed annually in the United States, electrocauterization devices are utilized to coagulate blood and reduce bleeding. Today the gold standard for these devices passes high radio frequency currents through the body, generating high heat energy to dehydrate and vaporize cells. This technique presents risks of electrocution and severe burns to the patient, as well as RF interference with personal care devices and critical care monitoring systems. A new device has been cre… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 5 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In another study, (He et al, 2012) compared harmonic focus with electrocautery to achieve safe surgery and the result is not different from other researches, reduction in operative time, blood loss, total drainage volume, days of stay, and visual analogue scale for harmonic focus while no significant differences in seroma, hematoma, and flap necrosis for both groups. (Kleinhans et al, 2014) created a device with direct current from the body, which is a more effective and safer alternative to electrocautery, reducing blood loss and using a temperature that prevents electric shocks. Consequently, expectations are to reduce costs and increase safety, and these expectations have been confirmed by studies.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In another study, (He et al, 2012) compared harmonic focus with electrocautery to achieve safe surgery and the result is not different from other researches, reduction in operative time, blood loss, total drainage volume, days of stay, and visual analogue scale for harmonic focus while no significant differences in seroma, hematoma, and flap necrosis for both groups. (Kleinhans et al, 2014) created a device with direct current from the body, which is a more effective and safer alternative to electrocautery, reducing blood loss and using a temperature that prevents electric shocks. Consequently, expectations are to reduce costs and increase safety, and these expectations have been confirmed by studies.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%