You are about to leave jnjmedtech.com. By clicking to continue, you will be taken to a web site governed by their own Legal and Privacy Policies.
MEGADYNE™ Telescoping Soft Tissue Dissector
MEGADYNE™ Telescoping Soft Tissue Dissector
Powered by GEM Technology. Less thermal damage1 and a flexible working length.
Features & Benefits
The GEM Difference
The patented intelligent Geometric Electron Modulation (GEM) Technology can deliver the efficiency and hemostasis you want with significantly less thermal damage* than standard monopolar electrosurgery. Power delivered fluctuates based on tissue impedance, which was designed for less thermal damage.2
Less Instrument Exchange vs. Scalpel
This multifunctional tool can be used for incision, dissection, and coagulation, which may increase surgical efficiency.3 Can eliminate the need for a surgical scalpel in the OR, removing a risk for sharps injuries.6
Less Need to Exchange Electrodes4
Telescoping shaft extends up to 6" for access to deep surgical cavities.5
Less Surgical Smoke vs. Stainless Steel Blades
99.6% less surgical smoke.7 97% reduction in toxic BaP.7 75% reduction in phenanthrene, a known irritant.7
Supporting Documentation
Product Support
MEGADYNE™ Telescoping Soft Tissue Dissectors Product Information
MEGADYNE™ Telescoping Soft Tissue Dissector Fact Sheet
MEGADYNE™ Telescoping Soft Tissue Dissectors Value Analysis Summary
Geometric Electron Modulation (GEM) Technology Technical Monograph
References
- In ACE Mode vs. standard monopolar electrosurgery: In a preclinical porcine model on abdominal wall dermis that measured thermal damage via histology (p<0.05). (075571-190301)
- Based on proprietary GEM Technology and preclinical porcine testing on abdominal wall dermis that measured thermal damage via histology (p<0.05). GEM Technology and test results are achieved when used on the Megadyne Mega Power generator in GEM Mode only. (083164-190305)
- (075573-190306)
- (100922-190429)
- (100925-190429)
- In a clinical study vs. cold steel scalpel that demonstrated noninferior wound healing/scar formation via the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) (p<0.0001). Lee BJ, et al. Advanced Cutting Effect System versus Cold Steel Scalpel: Comparative Wound Healing and Scar Formation in Targeted Surgical Applications. Plast Reconstr Surgery Glob Open. 2014;2(10). (075570-190305)
- In ACE Mode vs. standard monopolar electrosurgery: In a preclinical porcine model vs. uncoated stainless steel blades at 60W (p<0.001). Kisch T, et al. Electrocautery Devices with Feedback Mode and Teflon-Coated Blades Create Less Surgical Smoke for a Quality Improvement in the Operating Theater. Medicine, 2015;94(27). (075563-190304)
For complete indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, and adverse reactions, please reference full package insert.
© Ethicon US, LLC. 2019.
For complete indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, and adverse reactions, please reference full package insert.
This site is published by Ethicon US, LLC, which is solely responsible for its contents, and is intended for U.S. audiences only.
This site is intended for Healthcare Professionals. If you are a patient, it is important that you discuss information about the benefits and risks of products with your doctor.
Last updated February 20, 2019. The third-party trademarks used herein are trademarks of their respective owners. Data and usage fees may apply. See your carrier for more information.