Background/Objectives: Cytoreductive surgery for women with advanced ovarian cancer is a demanding process with high morbidity. The present analysis aims to identify whether using the Ligasure® Maryland jaw open sealer/divider (LMJsd) with a nanocoating (Covidien®, Medtronic®, 710 Medtronic Parkway, Minneapolis, MN, USA), could lead to better outcomes during cytoreduction surgery by reducing intraoperative bleeding and other hospitalization-related parameters. Methods: Patients with ovarian cancer (FIGO III/IV) who were subjected to primary or interval cytoreductive surgery at the Gynecologic-Oncology Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece, were included in the analysis. Patients were retrospectively allocated into two groups: women operated on with or without using the LMJsd. Differences between the two groups (intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion, duration of surgery, postoperative blood transfusion, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), and overall hospital length of stay) were investigated. Results: From 2012 to 2020, 284 women with ovarian cancer were surgically treated; 208 were stage III/IV. In the LMJsd group of women (n = 34), the duration of surgery and blood loss during surgery were significantly decreased (p < 0.0005) compared to the non-LMJsd group (n= 174). The intraoperative blood transfusion rate and the number of packed red blood cell units transfused were significantly decreased in the first group (p = 0.0025); the postoperative blood transfusion rate was not different (p = 0.065). Moreover, ICU admission and overall hospital length of stay were significantly decreased in the LMJsd group (p < 0.0005 and p = 0.015). Conclusions: Using the LMJsd is associated with decreased intraoperative bleeding and transfusion rates, duration of surgery, admission to ICU, and overall hospital length of stay in women treated with surgical cytoreduction for advanced ovarian cancer. Some limitations of this study are as follows: its limited impact because it is an observational retrospective analysis and bias because the cumulative experience of the surgeons may have an impact on the surgical outcomes.
Tsolakidis et al. (Fri,) studied this question.