A range of wands for ablation, resection and coagulation* of tissue across range of procedures using WEREWOLF COBLATION Technology – shown to operate at lower temperatures than other methods**1-4
Designed to help minimise clogging, with a thin-edged cutting tip, an additional backside electrode for coagulation and the most durable electrode in our ENT wand portfolio.5
Up to 6-inch malleable shaft, shown to allow access to the choanae during adenoidectomy, with a triple-wire electrode.6,7
Featuring the same malleable shaft and triple-wire active electrode, shown to offer efficient tissue removal (in vivo).8
Large, flat-screen electrode has been shown to offer >20% faster ablation that the EVAC 70 XTRA Wand (ex vivo).9
Comparable performance to the EVAC 70 XTRA Wand, but with a lower-profile shaft, which may be more suited to a smaller anatomy.9-11
Features a small electrode, shown in laboratory testing to allow fine dissection.12
Integrates ablation, suction and bipolar haemostasis in a small design to allow for precision and visibility during surgery.13-16
*Features depend on wand selection. Please refer to each individual product’sinstructions for use.
**COBLATION ENT Technology operates a lower temperature than monopolar RFtechnologies, laser technology and the PEAK plasma blade.
For detailed product information, including indications for use, contraindications,precautions and warnings, please consult the product’s applicable Instructions for Use(IFU) prior to use.
Products may not be available in all markets because product availability is subject tothe regulatory and/or medical practices in individual markets. Please contact yourSmith+Nephew representative or distributor if you have questions about theavailability of Smith+Nephew products in your area.
◊Trademark of Smith+Nephew. All trademarks acknowledged. ©2022Smith+Nephew. All rights reserved.
1. Smith+Nephew 2010. Internal report. PN 69832 Rev A.
2. Smith+Nephew 2010. Internal report. PN 86791 Rev 1.
3. Smith+Nephew 2010. Internal report. P/N 86257 Rev A.
4. Smith+Nephew 2010. Internal report. P/N 60736-01 Rev A.
5. Smith+Nephew 2020. Internal report. P/N 113227 Rev A.
6. Mularczyk C, et al. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;104:29 - 31.
7. Smith+Nephew 2004. Internal report. P/N 12595 Rev C.
8. Smith+Nephew 2010. Internal report. PN 69832 Rev A.
9. Smith+Nephew 2010. Internal report. P/N 37785-01_A.
10. Smith+Nephew 2011. Internal report. 35684-01 Rev A.
11. Smith+Nephew 2007. Internal report. 18752 Rev A.
12. Smith+Nephew. Internal report. 14409 Rev B.
13. Varadharajan K, et al. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;135:110113.
14. Hoey AW, et al. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42(6):1211 - 1217.
15. Smith+Nephew 2007. Internal report. 21480 Rev A.
16. Smith+Nephew 2008. Internal report. 21487.
17. Magdy EA, et al. J Laryngol Otol. 2008;122(3):282 - 290.
18. Roje Z, et al. Coll Antropol. 2009;33(1):293 - 298.
19. Roy S, et al. Am J Otolaryngol - Head Neck Med Surg. 2010;31(5):356 - 359.
20. Roy S, et al. Am J Otolaryngol - Head Neck Med Surg. 2015;36(1):63 - 66.
21. Matt BH, et al. Otolaryngol - Head Neck Surg. 2010;143(3):454 - 455.
22. Smith+Nephew 2017. Internal report. P/N 91999.
23. Temple RH, et al. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2001;61(3):195 - 198.
24. Francis DO, et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156(3):442-455.
25. Smith+Nephew 2021. Internal report. EA/ENT/COBLATION/002/V4.
Text