Ultrasonic surgery: Power quantification and efficiency optimization

Background: Ultrasonic surgery systems present the surgeon with a host of control parameters and design choices that may directly affect clinical outcome. These include amplitude setting, probe/cannula tip design, probe/cannula diameter, vibration frequency, and mode of energy delivery. Currently, n...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Aesthetic surgery journal 2001-05, Vol.21 (3), p.233-241
1. Verfasser: Cimino, William W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 241
container_issue 3
container_start_page 233
container_title Aesthetic surgery journal
container_volume 21
creator Cimino, William W.
description Background: Ultrasonic surgery systems present the surgeon with a host of control parameters and design choices that may directly affect clinical outcome. These include amplitude setting, probe/cannula tip design, probe/cannula diameter, vibration frequency, and mode of energy delivery. Currently, no commonly accepted objective means of measurement (or measurements) exists that can be used to assess the impact of these control parameters, to compare different systems/designs, or to provide a common basis for interpreting clinical outcomes. Objectives: The goals of this study were to develop the following as functions of the surgeon's choice of control parameters: (1) a measure of the vibratory power that could potentially be applied to the subcutaneous tissues, and (2) a measure of the effectiveness of the applied vibratory power. Methods: The vibratory power produced by 4 commercially available ultrasonic surgery systems was quantified on the basis of a measured temperature rise in a known volume of water with various combinations of ultrasonic probes/cannulas. The data were normalized to develop a measure of energy efficiency. Results: The data show that ultrasonic surgical probes/cannulas have zones of high and low efficiency, that the vibratory power and energy efficiency that may be applied to tissues varies widely over the range of the possible control parameters, and that zones of optimal efficiency may be developed. Conclusions: Two simple measurements referred to as H2O power and energy efficiency provide a basis for objective comparison of different ultrasonic instrumentation. These measurements will assist in standardizing clinical observations. ( Aesthetic Surg J 2001;21:233-241.)
doi_str_mv 10.1067/maj.2001.116006
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71394191</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1090820X01777837</els_id><sourcerecordid>71394191</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2996-d2a36d2f333c587fac8b2a183086103a8d3f83e8ebd1461fc5ec2d5cbc258c843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kLtPwzAQhy0EoqUws6FMbGn9SBybDZWnVAkGKnWzHPuCXOXR2gmo_PWkTSUmprvTffeT7kPomuApwTybVXo9pRiTKSEcY36CxiSlWcwYXp32PZY4FhSvRugihDXGWDKenKMRkYwRIcUYPSzL1uvQ1M5EofOf4Hd30XvzDT7adrpuXeGMbl1TR7q2ERT96KA2u6jZtK5yP4fdJTordBng6lgnaPn0-DF_iRdvz6_z-0VsqJQ8tlQzbmnBGDOpyAptRE41EQwLTjDTwrJCMBCQW5JwUpgUDLWpyQ1NhREJm6DbIXfjm20HoVWVCwbKUtfQdEFlhMmESNKDswE0vgnBQ6E23lXa7xTBai9O9eLUXpwaxPUXN8foLq_A_vFHUz0gBwD6B78ceBUOJsA6D6ZVtnH_hv8CPiJ9XQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71394191</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ultrasonic surgery: Power quantification and efficiency optimization</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Cimino, William W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Cimino, William W.</creatorcontrib><description>Background: Ultrasonic surgery systems present the surgeon with a host of control parameters and design choices that may directly affect clinical outcome. These include amplitude setting, probe/cannula tip design, probe/cannula diameter, vibration frequency, and mode of energy delivery. Currently, no commonly accepted objective means of measurement (or measurements) exists that can be used to assess the impact of these control parameters, to compare different systems/designs, or to provide a common basis for interpreting clinical outcomes. Objectives: The goals of this study were to develop the following as functions of the surgeon's choice of control parameters: (1) a measure of the vibratory power that could potentially be applied to the subcutaneous tissues, and (2) a measure of the effectiveness of the applied vibratory power. Methods: The vibratory power produced by 4 commercially available ultrasonic surgery systems was quantified on the basis of a measured temperature rise in a known volume of water with various combinations of ultrasonic probes/cannulas. The data were normalized to develop a measure of energy efficiency. Results: The data show that ultrasonic surgical probes/cannulas have zones of high and low efficiency, that the vibratory power and energy efficiency that may be applied to tissues varies widely over the range of the possible control parameters, and that zones of optimal efficiency may be developed. Conclusions: Two simple measurements referred to as H2O power and energy efficiency provide a basis for objective comparison of different ultrasonic instrumentation. These measurements will assist in standardizing clinical observations. ( Aesthetic Surg J 2001;21:233-241.)</description><identifier>ISSN: 1090-820X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-330X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1067/maj.2001.116006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19331898</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Mosby, Inc</publisher><ispartof>Aesthetic surgery journal, 2001-05, Vol.21 (3), p.233-241</ispartof><rights>2001 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2996-d2a36d2f333c587fac8b2a183086103a8d3f83e8ebd1461fc5ec2d5cbc258c843</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19331898$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cimino, William W.</creatorcontrib><title>Ultrasonic surgery: Power quantification and efficiency optimization</title><title>Aesthetic surgery journal</title><addtitle>Aesthet Surg J</addtitle><description>Background: Ultrasonic surgery systems present the surgeon with a host of control parameters and design choices that may directly affect clinical outcome. These include amplitude setting, probe/cannula tip design, probe/cannula diameter, vibration frequency, and mode of energy delivery. Currently, no commonly accepted objective means of measurement (or measurements) exists that can be used to assess the impact of these control parameters, to compare different systems/designs, or to provide a common basis for interpreting clinical outcomes. Objectives: The goals of this study were to develop the following as functions of the surgeon's choice of control parameters: (1) a measure of the vibratory power that could potentially be applied to the subcutaneous tissues, and (2) a measure of the effectiveness of the applied vibratory power. Methods: The vibratory power produced by 4 commercially available ultrasonic surgery systems was quantified on the basis of a measured temperature rise in a known volume of water with various combinations of ultrasonic probes/cannulas. The data were normalized to develop a measure of energy efficiency. Results: The data show that ultrasonic surgical probes/cannulas have zones of high and low efficiency, that the vibratory power and energy efficiency that may be applied to tissues varies widely over the range of the possible control parameters, and that zones of optimal efficiency may be developed. Conclusions: Two simple measurements referred to as H2O power and energy efficiency provide a basis for objective comparison of different ultrasonic instrumentation. These measurements will assist in standardizing clinical observations. ( Aesthetic Surg J 2001;21:233-241.)</description><issn>1090-820X</issn><issn>1527-330X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kLtPwzAQhy0EoqUws6FMbGn9SBybDZWnVAkGKnWzHPuCXOXR2gmo_PWkTSUmprvTffeT7kPomuApwTybVXo9pRiTKSEcY36CxiSlWcwYXp32PZY4FhSvRugihDXGWDKenKMRkYwRIcUYPSzL1uvQ1M5EofOf4Hd30XvzDT7adrpuXeGMbl1TR7q2ERT96KA2u6jZtK5yP4fdJTordBng6lgnaPn0-DF_iRdvz6_z-0VsqJQ8tlQzbmnBGDOpyAptRE41EQwLTjDTwrJCMBCQW5JwUpgUDLWpyQ1NhREJm6DbIXfjm20HoVWVCwbKUtfQdEFlhMmESNKDswE0vgnBQ6E23lXa7xTBai9O9eLUXpwaxPUXN8foLq_A_vFHUz0gBwD6B78ceBUOJsA6D6ZVtnH_hv8CPiJ9XQ</recordid><startdate>200105</startdate><enddate>200105</enddate><creator>Cimino, William W.</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200105</creationdate><title>Ultrasonic surgery: Power quantification and efficiency optimization</title><author>Cimino, William W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2996-d2a36d2f333c587fac8b2a183086103a8d3f83e8ebd1461fc5ec2d5cbc258c843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cimino, William W.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Aesthetic surgery journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cimino, William W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ultrasonic surgery: Power quantification and efficiency optimization</atitle><jtitle>Aesthetic surgery journal</jtitle><addtitle>Aesthet Surg J</addtitle><date>2001-05</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>233</spage><epage>241</epage><pages>233-241</pages><issn>1090-820X</issn><eissn>1527-330X</eissn><abstract>Background: Ultrasonic surgery systems present the surgeon with a host of control parameters and design choices that may directly affect clinical outcome. These include amplitude setting, probe/cannula tip design, probe/cannula diameter, vibration frequency, and mode of energy delivery. Currently, no commonly accepted objective means of measurement (or measurements) exists that can be used to assess the impact of these control parameters, to compare different systems/designs, or to provide a common basis for interpreting clinical outcomes. Objectives: The goals of this study were to develop the following as functions of the surgeon's choice of control parameters: (1) a measure of the vibratory power that could potentially be applied to the subcutaneous tissues, and (2) a measure of the effectiveness of the applied vibratory power. Methods: The vibratory power produced by 4 commercially available ultrasonic surgery systems was quantified on the basis of a measured temperature rise in a known volume of water with various combinations of ultrasonic probes/cannulas. The data were normalized to develop a measure of energy efficiency. Results: The data show that ultrasonic surgical probes/cannulas have zones of high and low efficiency, that the vibratory power and energy efficiency that may be applied to tissues varies widely over the range of the possible control parameters, and that zones of optimal efficiency may be developed. Conclusions: Two simple measurements referred to as H2O power and energy efficiency provide a basis for objective comparison of different ultrasonic instrumentation. These measurements will assist in standardizing clinical observations. ( Aesthetic Surg J 2001;21:233-241.)</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>19331898</pmid><doi>10.1067/maj.2001.116006</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1090-820X
ispartof Aesthetic surgery journal, 2001-05, Vol.21 (3), p.233-241
issn 1090-820X
1527-330X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71394191
source Oxford University Press Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
title Ultrasonic surgery: Power quantification and efficiency optimization
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T17%3A39%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ultrasonic%20surgery:%20Power%20quantification%20and%20efficiency%20optimization&rft.jtitle=Aesthetic%20surgery%20journal&rft.au=Cimino,%20William%20W.&rft.date=2001-05&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=233&rft.epage=241&rft.pages=233-241&rft.issn=1090-820X&rft.eissn=1527-330X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1067/maj.2001.116006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71394191%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71394191&rft_id=info:pmid/19331898&rft_els_id=S1090820X01777837&rfr_iscdi=true