Development and evaluation of a novel surgical smoke removal device
Abstract No:
1681
Abstract Type:
Student Poster
Authors:
J Su1, M Lin1
Institutions:
1National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan
Presenter:
Jing-Wen Su
National Cheng Kung University
National Cheng Kung University
Faculty Advisor:
Ming-Yeng Lin
National Cheng Kung University
National Cheng Kung University
Description:
Surgical smoke is produced during surgical process when using high frequency electrical current to cut and coagulate the tissue. Surgical smoke contains high concentration of particulate matters and hazards gases(1). This may pose health risks to medical personnel working in operation rooms (2, 3).
Situation/Problem:
Surgical smoke is an important problem in the operation room. At present, local ventilation system is adopted in some operating rooms(4, 5). However, local exhaust ventilation is sometimes blocked by blood clot and may generate high noise levels(6). Here, we aim to develop a novel surgical smoke removal device by using negative ions and evaluate its particle removal efficiency.
Methods:
The experiment was performed in an operating room which is 4 m wide, 2.4 m high, and 5 m in length. We simulated the surgical smoke generation by cutting pork using electrosurgical units (Model: SW12200, Shining World Health Care Co. Ltd., Taiwan). We attached an ionizer (Model: Model HB-D12-2, Whirl Best International Co., Ltd., Taiwan) to the electrosurgical unit. During the experiment, every sample was continuously cut for 20 s. We then wait until the particle concentration reaches background level before cutting again. The particle concentration was measured by using the Fast mobility particle sizer (FMPS, Model 3091 series, TSI Inc., MN, USA), Scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS, electrostatic classifier model 3082 and condensation particle counter model 3787, TSI Inc., MN, USA) and DustTrak II (Model: 8530, TSI Inc., MN, USA). We placed the sampling inlet 10 cm from the source and also at the breathing zone. We measured the particle concentration with and without using the ionizer and local exhaust ventilation for five times each. The noise level was measured with a sound level meter (Model: TES-1352S, TES Electrical Electronic Corp., Taiwan).
Results / Conclusions:
Preliminary results show that the number and mass concentration at the breathing zone was 2.7×105 particles/cm3 and 2.73 mg/m3, respectively. In addition, the number and mass concentration near the source was 2.1×106 particles/cm3 and 27.0 mg/m3. This indicates the current ventilation system in the operation room might not be enough to help protect the workers. When using the local exhaust ventilation with flow rate of 40 L/min, the particle concentration reduced to 1.2×105 particles/cm3 and 1.18 mg/m3 at the breathing zone. Moreover, the local exhaust ventilation increases the noise from 50 dBA to 75 dBA. When turning on the negative ionizer, particle number concentration and the mass concentration reduced around 60% at the breathing zone. In addition, the ionizer can reduce 67% and 87% of particle number and mass concentration near the source, respectively. Adding the ionizer can not only help reduce the particle concentration, but also will not generate additional noise. Thus, the novel surgical smoke removal device provides an alternative way to reduce the workplace hazard and protect the health workers.
Primary Topic:
Engineering Controls and Ventilation
Secondary Topics:
Aerosols
Indoor Environmental Quality/Indoor Air Quality
Co-Authors
Please add your co-authors below. Co-authors are listed for professional courtesy and will not be communicated with regarding the decision notification or any on-site logistics, if accepted. Only the primary presenter listed is expected to attend and present the content on-site.
Acknowledgements and References
List any additional people who worked on the project or provided guidance and support along with details on the role they played in the research. (Please include first name, last name, organization, city, state and country).
1 Pierce, J.S., S.E. Lacey, J.F. Lippert, R. Lopez, and J.E. Franke: Laser-Generated Air Contaminants from Medical Laser Applications: A State-of-the-Science Review of Exposure Characterization, Health Effects, and Control. Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene 8(7): 447-466 (2011).
2 Okoshi, K., K. Kobayashi, K. Kinoshita, Y. Tomizawa, S. Hasegawa, and Y. Sakai: Health risks associated with exposure to surgical smoke for surgeons and operation room personnel. Surgery today 45(8): 957-965 (2015).
3 OSHA: "Laser/Electrosurgery Plume." 2016.
4 Dalal, A.J., and A.S. McLennan: Surgical smoke evacuation: a modification to improve efficiency and minimise potential health risk. British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 55(1): 90-91 (2017).
5 Schultz, L.: An Analysis of Surgical Smoke Plume Components, Capture, and Evacuation. AORN journal 99(2): 289-298 (2014).
6 Seipp, H.M., T. Steffens, J. Weigold, A. Lahmer, A. Maier-Hasselmann, T. Herzog et al.: Efficiencies and noise levels of portable surgical smoke evacuation systems. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 15(11): 773-781 (2018).