Image module

Improved visualization designed for a safer procedure.1;6

The LiNA McCartney TubeTM assists in identifying where to safely seal and divide the uterine vessels.1,2;6;8 The device also provides protection of the ureters from trauma during surgery by keeping the ureters in sight and out of the operative field.1;5

LiNA McCartney Tube™

Convenient, single-use conduit for needle, suture and specimen during total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Image module

+ Provides a clear template for bladder dissection and colpotomy.1;3;5;6

Image module

+ The silicone tube tamponades the vaginal vault and ensures maintenance of pneumoperitoneum2,4;6 while also providing an easy exit for specimen.2,4;6;7

Image module

+ The LiNA McCartney Tube™ offers the ability to laparoscopically suture the vaginal vault by delivering convenient entry and exit for needle and suture.6;7;1

Adapting to your surgical needs

This sterile, single-use device has a lid with 5mm and 10mm valves, which prevent loss of pneumoperitoneum and enables insertion of instruments.2,4;6;7 In addition, the LiNA McCartney Tube™ tip withstands both electrosurgical and ultrasonic energy. Available in two sizes for atraumatic insertion and anatomic fit.

Image module

Specimen conduit to reduce the risk of metastases

The McCartney Tube™ acts as a specimen conduit to reduce the risk of metastases. It is not designed as a uterine manipulator. The use of uterine manipulators is associated with worsened oncological outcomes in patients with cervical and endometrial cancer.8;9

Society recommendations

to reduce uterine manipulation

The ESGE-SERGS joint statement on MIS hysterectomy for cervical cancer recommends to reduce uterine manipulation.8,9 The ESGO stated that uterine manipulators should be banned in an effort to avoid spillage of tumor cells in the peritoneal cavity.10

LiNA McCartney Tube™

Documentation

Clinical Support

1 Elkington et al. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy: A tried and tested technique. Journal of Minimally Invasive
Gynecology (2005) 12, 267-274

2 Janda et al. Quality of life after total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer (LACE): a randomised trial.
Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 772–80

3 Lee et al. Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy Using Lee-Huang Portal and McCartney Transvaginal Tube.
Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 9(4):536–540, 2002

4 Manolitas et al. Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in the Management of Endometrial Carcinoma.
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 9(1):54–62, 2002

5 Mourtis et al. Safety of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in early-stage endometrial cancer: a randomised trial.
Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 763–71

6 McCartney et al. Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy with a Transvaginal Tube.
Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2004, 11(1):79–82)

7 Obermaier et al. Feasibility and Safety of Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy.
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 10(3):345–349, 2003

8 Working group of ESGE and SERGS. The role of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: ESGE-SERGS position document and joint-statement.
Facts Views Vis Obgyn, 2020, 12 (1): 13-19

9 Padilla-Iserte et al. Impact of uterine manipulator on oncological outcome in endometrial cancer surgery.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;224:65.e1-11.

10 ESGO. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: An ESGO statement.
Accessed online