I.V. KLYUCHAROV¹, V.V. MOROZOV²

¹Kazan State Medical University, 49 Butlerov Str., Kazan, Russian Federation, 420012

²Georgetown University, Washington, DC 20010, the USA

Klyucharov I.V. — Cand. Med. Sc., Associate Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology No.1, tel. +7-917-282-44-74, e-mail: igormedexpert@gmail.com

Morozov V.M. — Associate Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, tel. 410-328-59-64, e-mail: Morozovfamily13@gmail.com

 Electrosurgery is the most commonly used and misunderstood medical technology. The use of electrosurgery in liquid media requires an understanding of the mechanisms of the effect of electricity on tissues and interaction of fluid media with the patient’s body. The use of electricity in monopolar equipment configuration requires the use of non-electrolyte, dielectric media, whereas bipolar configuration — conductive, electrolyte-containing media. In the case of a dielectric medium, the human body is “included” in the electrical circuit in the place where it is necessary to ensure the effect of electricity when the circuit is closed. In the case of a conductive medium around the active electrode, an ionized gas, plasma, is formed, which has the necessary effect on the tissue that is not included in the electrical circuit. Liquid media also have a number of side effects. Knowledge of the principles of electrosurgery and the limits of safe use ensures both effective energy use and patient safety during the operation.

Key words: electrosurgery, monopolar, bipolar, hysteroscopy.

REFERENCES

1. Reuben I. Uterine endoscopy endometroscopy with the aid of uterine insufflation. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1925, no. 10, rr. 313–327.
2. Droegemueller W., Greer B., Makowski E. Cryosurgery in patients with dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Obstet Gynecol, 1971, no. 38, rr. 256–258.
3. Neuwirth R.S., Amin H.K. Excision of submucus fibroids with hysteroscopic control. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1976, no. 126, rr. 95–99.
4. De Cherney A., Polan M.L. Hysteroscopic management of intrauterine lesions and intractable uterine bleeding. Obstet Gynecol, 1983, no. 61, rr. 392–397.
5. Vancaillie T.G. Electrocoagulation of the endometrium with the ball-end resectoscope. Obstet Gynecol, 1989, no. 74, rr. 425–427.
6. Pearce J.A. General requirements for generators. In Electrosurgery. Publisher John Wiley and sons. New York. Pp 30–36.
7. Baggish M.S., Brill A.L., Rosensweig et al. Fatal acute glycine and sorbitol toxicity during operative hysteroscopy. Journal of gynecological surgery, 1993, no. 9, rr. 137–143.
8. Overton C., Heargreaves J., Maresh M. A national survey of complications of the endometrial destruction for menstrual disorders: the Mistletoe study. British journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 1997, no. 102, rr. 1351–1359.
9. Istre O., Skajaa K., Schjoensby A.P. et al. Changes in serum electrolytes after transcervical resection of endometrium and submucous fibroids with use of glycine 1,5 % for uterine irrigation. Obstetrics and gynecology, 1992, no. 80, rr. 218-222.
10. Wendt-Nordahl G., Hacker A., Reich N. et al. The Vista System: a new bipolar resection device for endourological procedures: comparison with conventional resectoscope. Eur Urol, 2004, no. 46, rr. 86–90.
11. Golan A., Sagiv R., Berar M. et al. Bipolar Electrical Energy in Physiologic Solution—A Revolution in Operative Hysteroscopy. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 2001, vol, 8, no. 2, pp. 252–258.
12. Riedel H.H., Semm K. There is no place in gynecological endoscope for unipolar of bipolar high frequency current. Endoscopy, 1982, no. 14, rr. 51–54.
13. Levy B.S., Soderstrom R.M., Dail D.H. et al. Bowel injuries during laparoscopy. Gross anatomy and histology. J Reprod Med, 1985, no. 30, rr. 168–172.
14. Odell R.C. Electrosurgery: principles and safety issues. Clin Obstet Gyn, 1995, 38, rr. 610–621.
15. Rademaker B.M.P., van Kesteren P.J.M., de Haan P., Rademaker D., France C. How Safe Is the Intravasation Limit in Hysteroscopic Surgery? Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 2011, vol, 18, no. 3, rr. 355–361.
16. Kolmer T., Norlen H. Transurethral resection of the prostate: a review of 1111 cases. Int Urol Neph, 1989, no. 21, rr. 47–55.
17. Koshiba K., Egawa S., Ohori M. et al. Does transurethral resection of prostate pose a risk to life? 22 years outcome. J Urol, 1995, no. 153, rr. 1506–1509.
18. Mebust W.K., Holtgrewe H.L., Cockett A.T. et al. Transurethral prostatectomy: Immediate and postoperative complications: a cooperative study of 13 participating institutions evaluating 3885 patients. J Urol, 1989, no. 141, rr. 243–247.
19. Kudela M., Lubusky D., Dzvincuk P. Risk of fluid overload syndrome during hysteroscopy procedures. Cesk Gyn, 1996, no. 61, rr. 291–293.
20. Estes C.M., Maye J.P. Severe intraoperative hyponatremia in a patient scheduled for elective hysteroscopy: a case report. AANAJ, 2003, no. 71, rr. 203–205.
21. Singh H., Desai M., Shrivastav P. et al. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of prostate: randomized controlled study. J Endour, 2005, no. 19, rr. 333–338.
22. Starkman J.S., Santucci R. Comparison of bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate with standard transurethral prostatectomy: shorter stay, earlier catheter removal and fewer complications. BJU Int, 2005, no. 95, rr. 69–71.
23. Patel A., Adshead J. First clinical experience with new transurethral bipolar prostate electrosurgery resection system: controlled tissue ablation (Coblation Technology). J Endour, 2004, no. 18, rr. 959–964.
24. Mencaglia L., Cavalcanti L. Histeroscopia Cirùrgica. Rio de Janeiro, Union Task Press, 2004. Rr. 15–28.
25. Luciano A.A., Whitman G., Maier D.B. et al. A comparison of thermal injury, healing patterns, and postoperative adhesion formation following CO2 laser and electromicrosurgery. Fert Steril, 1987, no. 48, rr. 1025–1029.
26. Makris N., Vomvolaki E., Mantzaris G. et al. Role of a bipolar resectoscope in subinfertile women with submucous myomas and menstrual disorders. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2007, no. 33(6), rr. 849–854.
27. Loffer F.D. Preliminary experience with the VersaPoint bipolar resectoscope using a vaporizing electrode in a saline distending medium. J Am Ass Gyn Lapar, 2004, rr, no. 7, rr. 498–502.
28. Golan A., Sagiv R., Berar M. et al. Bipolar electrical energy in physiologic solution: a revolution in operative hysteroscopy. J Am Ass Gyn Lapar, 2001, no. 8, rr. 252–256.
29. Singh H., Desai M., Shrivastav P. et al. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of prostate: randomized controlled study. J Endour, 2005, no. 19, rr. 333–338.