Highlighted are countries of origin for publications demonstrating the successful use of LigaSure™ technology in clinical settings across all types of hysterectomy.

Product Portfolio

  • *. Other energy devices have included conventional and advanced energy bipolar, and harmonic scalpel. 

  • 1. Rhou, Y. J. J. et al. Direct hospital costs of total laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with fast-trackopen hysterectomy at a tertiary hospital: A retrospective case-controlled study. Aust. New Zeal. J.Obstet. Gynaecol. 55, 584–587 (2015). 

  • 2. Nouri, K. et al. Bipolar vessel sealing increases operative safety in laparoscopic-assisted vaginalhysterectomy. Arch Gynecol Obs. 283, 91–95 (2009). (PMID: 20039049)

  • 3. Silva-Filho, A. L. et al. Randomized study of bipolar vessel sealing system versus conventional sutureligature for vaginal hysterectomy. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 146, 200–203 (2009). (PMID:19380188) 

  • 4. Iwanicki, S., Cenaiko, D. & Robert, M. Retrospective review of vaginal salpingectomies: Success ratesand complications. Int. Urogynecol. J. Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 25, S165–S166 (2014). 

  • 5. Labib, K., El-Mansy, H. & Ibrahim, M. Laparoscopic Hysterectomy of a 20 weeks uterus weighting 1 Kgwith extensive adhesions. Gynecol. Surg. 13, S173–S173 (2016). 

  • 6. Wattiez, A., Vazquez, A., Maia, S. & Alcocer, J. Total laparoscopic removal of huge uterus using theligasureTM device, classical bipolar and barbed V-locTM suture. Gynecol. Surg. 8, S81–S81 (2011). 

  • 7. Fleisch, M. C., Nestle-Kramling, C., Benthin, M., Stoff-Khalili, M. A. & Dall, P. Initial experience with a Abipolar blood vessel sealing system (LigasureTM) for gynecologic oncology surgery. GeburtshilfeFrauenheilkd. 63, 555–559 (2003). 

  • 8. Kriplani, A., Garg, P., Sharma, M., Lal, S. & Agarwal, N. A review of total laparoscopic hysterectomy usingLigaSure uterine artery-sealing device: AIIMS experience. J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. A 18, 825–9(2008). (PMID: 18999973) 

  • 9. Bina, I. Laparoscopic hysterectomy. Iran. J. Reprod. Med. 9, 39–40 (2011). 

  • 10. Nevin-Maguire, D. et al. Laparoscopic resection of a rudimentary uterine horn in a patient with multiplecongenital anomalies. Ir. J. Med. Sci. 185, S232 (2016). (PMID: 72342005) 

  • 11. Rossetti, D. et al. Usefulness of vessel-sealing devices for peripartum hysterectomy: a retrospectivecohort study. Updat. Surg 67, 301–304 (2015). (PMID: 25813428) 

  • 12. Bani-Irshaid, I. & Nussair, B. Ligasure vessel sealing system versus conventional suture ligation methodin vaginal hysterectomy. J. R. Med. Serv. 21, 25–31 (2014).

  • 13. Kyo, S. et al. Experience and efficacy of a bipolar vessel sealing system for radical abdominalhysterectomy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 19, 1658–1661 (2009). (PMID: 19955955) 

  • 14. Essadi, F., Elmehashi, M., Sharkasi, A. & Ataweel, S. M. Ligasure versus traditional suture ligature inabdominal hysterectomy. Fertil. Steril. 92, S124–S124 (2009). 

  • 15. Leal, C., Ceron, R., Rubio, V. & Unda, M. E. Ultrasonic Energy (Harmonic Ace) Versus Advanced BipolarEnergy (Ligasure) in a Laparoscopic Hyterectomies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22, S166 (2015). (PMID:27678920) 

  • 16. Lakeman, M. M. E. et al. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing versus conventional clamping and suturingfor vaginal hysterectomy: A randomised controlled trial. BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 119, 1473–1482 (2012). (PMID: 22925365) 

  • 17. Suisted P., C. B. Perioperative outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy at a regional hospital inNew Zealand. Aust. New Zeal. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 57, 81–86 (2017). (PMID: 28251631) 

  • 18. Hagen, B., Eriksson, N. & Sundset, M. Randomised controlled trial of LigaSure versus conventionalsuture ligature for abdominal hysterectomy. BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 112, 968–970 (2005).(PMID: 15958001) 

  • 19. Ferreira, H. C., Soares, S., Caldas, R., Morgado, A. & Tome, A. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilabilateral adnexectomy using a ligasure maryland jaw instrument. Gynecol. Surg. 13, S166–S166 (2016).

  • 20. Plekhanov A, Shishkina I & Gamolin, V. How sils-port use makes laparoscopic subtotal hysterectomyfaster and safer procedure? Gynecol Surg 11, 304 (2014).

  • 21. Cronjé, H. S. & De Coning, E. C. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealing during vaginal hysterectomy. Int. J.Gynecol. Obstet. 91, 243–245 (2005). (PMID: 16243338) 

  • 22. Yang, Y. S., Kim, S. Y., Hur, M. H. & Oh, K. Y. Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery-assistedVersus Single-port Laparoscopic-assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy: A Case-matched Study. J. Minim.Invasive Gynecol. 21, 624–631 (2014). (PMID: 24462594) 

  • 23. Gilabert-Estelles, J., Castello, J. M. & Gilabert-Aguilar, J. Transumbilical single-port laparoscopichysterectomy: Feasibility of the technique. Gynecol. Surg. 6, S55–S56 (2009). 

  • 24. Han, C. M. et al. Feasibility of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy using conventionalinstruments. Gynecol. Minim. Invasive Ther. 3, 47–49 (2014). (PMID: 2014454127)

  • 25. Aytan, H., Nazik, H., Narin, R., Api, M. & Tok, E. C. Comparison of the Use of LigaSure, HALO PKS CuttingForceps, and ENSEAL Tissue Sealer in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Randomized Trial. J. Minim.Invasive Gynecol. 21, 650–655 (2014). (PMID: 24462850) 

  • 26. Vanga, P., Padma, V. & Mohammed, A. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy: Our first experience. Gynecol.Surg. 10, S100–S101 (2013). 

  • 27. Holloran-Schwartz, M. B., Gavard, J. A., Martin, J. C., Blaskiewicz, R. J. & Yeung, P. P. Single-Use EnergySources and Operating Room Time for Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J.Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 23, 72–77 (2016). (PMID: 26318400)

  • 28. Rivero, J., Sotelo, R., Rivero, J., Oswaldo, C. & Monish, A. Laparo-endoscopic single site (LESS) simplehysterectomy. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 107, S408–S409 (2009). 

  • 29. Lakeman M, Kruitwagen RF, Vos MC, Roovers JP. Electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealingversus conventional clamping and suturing for total abdominal hysterectomy: a randomizedtrial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008;15(5):547-53. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2008.05.011.PMID:18619923

  • 30. Janssen PF, Brolmann HA, van Kesteren PJ, Bongers MY, et al. Perioperative outcomes usingLigaSure compared with conventional bipolar instruments in laparoscopic hysterectomy: arandomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2011;118(13):1568-75. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.03089.x. PMID:21895949

  • 31. Elhao M, Abdallah K, Serag I, El-Laithy M, et al. Efficacy of using electrosurgical bipolar vesselsealing during vaginal hysterectomy in patients with different degrees of operative difficulty:a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;147(1):86-90.doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.07.011. PMID:19729238

  • 32. Gizzo S, Burul G, Di Gangi S, Lamparelli L, et al. LigaSure vessel sealing system in vaginalhysterectomy: safety, efficacy and limitations. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;288(5):1067-74.doi:10.1007/s00404-013-2857-1. PMID:23625333

  • 33. Demirturk F, Aytan H, Caliskan AC. Comparison of the use of electrothermal bipolar vesselsealer with harmonic scalpel in total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Journal of Obstetrics andGynaecology Research. 2007;33(3):341-345. PMID:17578364

Provide details to continue

  • Your information will be protected in accordance with our privacy statement.

The site needs to use cookies to store information in your web browser, to make this site work. By clicking “Submit” you consent to the placement of these cookies. Learn more about our cookie policy.