Please note you are entering now content intended only for Healthcare Professionals.
Are you a HCP?
Tri-Staple™ technology reloads are designed to work in harmony with the natural properties of tissue before, during, and after stapling. Each reload has a stepped cartridge face that delivers graduated compression and three rows of varied height staples
The result of that design is a reload that provides superior strength and leak resistance4,8,Ω,†† across procedures.
No single stapler can address the wide range of tissue management issues faced by surgeons on a daily basis. That’s why we’ve given our entire portfolio the power of Tri-Staple™ technology. So you can have reliable results — no matter your specialty.
Tri-Staple™ 2.0 reloads are equipped with a computer chip that can communicate information during your procedure. When Signia™ and Tri-Staple™ 2.0 are combined you will receive information on the Signia™ screen before, during & after you fire, to help support clinical decision making.9
Tri-Staple™ Speciality reloads are designed to help you address procedurally specific challenges. All including Tri-Staple™ 2.0 technology for real-time feedback, the Curved Tip, Black, 30 mm, Reinforced and Radial reloads are all designed to work with both our Manual and Signia™ handles.
† Compared to flat-faced cartridges with single-height staples
‡ Compared to Echelon Flex™* green reloads analysis comparing different stapler designs, performance and impact on tissues under compression using 2-D finite element analysis.
§ Preclinical results may not correlate with clinical performance in humans.
Ω Bench test results may not necessarily be indicative of clinical performance. Compared to Ethicon Echelon Flex™*.
†† Staple line strength: Endo GIA™ tan reload vs. Echelon Flex™* white reload and Endo GIA™ purple reload vs. Echelon™* green, gold, and blue reloads. Leak resistance: In-vitro synthetic leak comparison: Endo GIA™ purple reload vs. Echelon™* blue and gold.
‡‡ Bench test results may not necessarily be indicative of clinical performance.
§§ Based on burst pressure testing in porcine colon comparing GIA80MTS (n = 12) and GIA80XTS (n = 12), Ethicon™* TLC75 (n = 24; p=0.010), Frankenman™* LC80B™ (n = 24; p = 0.000), and Panther™* SSAB-80 (n = 24; p=0.000).
ΩΩ Compared to flat-faced cartridges with single-height staples.
††† Preclinical results may not correlate with clinical performance in humans.
‡‡‡ Based on leak testing in in vivo canine model comparing TRIEEA25XT to Ethicon™* CDH25P (n = 9; P = 0.002), where 50 mm Hg represented a maximum expected colonic pressure.
§§§ Bench test results may not necessarily be indicative of clinical performance.
ΩΩΩ Staple line strength: Endo GIA™ tan reload vs. Echelon Flex™* white reload and Endo GIA™ purple reload vs. Echelon™* green, gold, and blue reloads. Leak resistance: In-vitro synthetic leak comparison: Endo GIA™ purple reload vs. Echelon™* blue and gold.
†††† Compared to Echelon Flex™* green reloads analysis comparing different stapler designs, performance and impact on tissues under compression using 2-D finite element analysis.
‡‡‡‡ Based on staple-line vascularity analysis using MicroCT in an in vivo canine model (CDH31P: n = 13; TRIEEA31XT: n = 15. P = 0.007).
§§§§Compared to GIA™ staplers with DST Series™ technology
1. Based on internal test report #PCG-007 rev 1, Perfusion into Clamped Media. Sept. 2, 2011.
2. Based on internal test report #PCG-018, 2-D FEA of linear staplers. November 2012.
3. Based on internal test report #2128-002-2, Final analysis of staple-line vascularity using MicroCT. July 2015.
4. Based on internal test report #PCG-001, Tyvek pull-apart test comparing Echelon™* and Tri-Staple™ technology. March 2011.
5. Based on internal test report #PCG-004, Undercrimp comparisons in increasing pads of foam between Echelon™* and Tri-Staple™ technology. January 2012.
6. Based on internal test report #PCG-006, Staple formation comparison between Medtronic EGIA60AXT and Ethicon ECR60G in an ex-vivo tissue model. January 2012.
7. Based on internal test report #PCG-019, Comparative test of Endo GIA™ stapler using black reloads with Tri-Staple™ technology and Ethicon Echelon Flex™* black reloads. June 2014
8. Based on internal test report #PCG-002, In-vitro leak comparison. March 08, 2011.
9. Based on PT00002451 Signia™ Stapler User Manual, Page 13.
10. Based on report #RE00324614 rev B, Lily comparative testing versus competitive devices. November 2021.
11. Based on internal report #RE00318260 rev 1, Comparative leak testing for EEA™ circular stapler with Tri-Staple™ technology and Ethicon™* CDH. April 2021.
12. Based on report #RE00142825, Image creation for Signia™ small diameter reload. March 26, 2019.
13. Based on internal report #RE00330708-rev1, Perfusion analysis for circular staplers, comparing EEA™ circular stapler with Tri-Staple™ technology. May 13, 2021.
14. Based on RE00498029 Competitive Evidence Final Report Signia with Tri-Staple Technology vs Intuitive's Da Vinci Robotic Stapling System with SureForm SmartFire Technology Competitive Evidence Final Report Rev A 2024
15. Based on interna test report RE00365456 In vivo leak test Tri-Staple EEA (TRIEEA25XT) and Ethicon Echelon Powered Stap (CDH25P)
16. Based on internal test report RE00171002 80mm GIA Tri-Staple Technology - Design Verification Report