title: Reprocessed bipolar energy for laparoscopic colectomy: Is it worth it?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Reprocessed (re-sterilized) bipolar energy devices represent one effort to reduce operative costs.
  
  
  METHODS
  Between January 2014 to October 2015, 76 patients underwent laparoscopic colectomy using a reprocessed bipolar energy device and were case-matched to 76 patients from a prospectively-maintained database from November 2012 to December 2013 when an identical, new device was used. Outcomes included reprocessed device safety, efficiency and hospital costs.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There was no difference in patient demographics, operative times or failed pedicle ligation requiring intervention between groups (all P > 0.05). In 19.7% of reprocessed cases, the surgeon opened an additional new device after dissatisfaction with the reprocessed instrument. Operating room costs and total costs were less for the reprocessed device group (all P < 0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Reprocessed bipolar energy devices were associated with savings in operative expenses, however, larger studies are warranted due to the high surgeon dissatisfaction regarding safety concerns with the reprocessed equipment.
authors.affiliation: Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
authors.forename: Justin T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Brady
authors.affiliation: Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
authors.forename: Avinash
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Bhakta
authors.affiliation: Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
authors.forename: Scott R
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Steele
authors.affiliation: Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Westlake Health Center, Westlake, OH, USA.
authors.forename: Joseph A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Trunzo
authors.affiliation: Department of Colorectal Surgery, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, TX, USA.
authors.forename: Anthony J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Senagore
authors.affiliation: University Hospitals St. John Medical Center, Westlake, OH, USA.
authors.forename: Krista
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Holmgren
authors.affiliation: University Hospitals St. John Medical Center, Westlake, OH, USA.
authors.forename: Anthony
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Schillero
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, Fairview Hospital, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address: champab2@ccf.org.
authors.forename: Bradley J
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Champagne
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D016063:Blood Loss, Surgical; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D003082:Colectomy / Q000191:economics*; D017743:Equipment Reuse; D005260:Female; D017721:Hospital Costs; D006801:Humans; D020706:Laparoscopes / Q000191:economics*; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000191:economics*; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D061646:Operative Time; D014481:United States
keywords: Colorectal surgery; Cost analysis; Laparoscopy