Shield™+ ENT Ablator

New Technology,
New Performance,
New Outcomes

  • Drive Patient Safety – Eliminates potential perioral injuries*
  • Deliver Clinical Performance – Provide fast, reliable RF hemostasis for T & A procedures
  • Reduce OR Expenses – Deliver new levels of clinical efficiency and economy

*ENT Ablator optimizes delivery of RF energy by eliminating potential perioral injuries and delivering desired outcomes fast and economically. AEM® Shield Technology diverts harmful stray energy from the patient while delivering reliable RF hemostasis with speed and economy.

"*" indicates required fields

New Technology is on the way, but is not yet 510k cleared for sale in the USA.

Perioral Burns Occur

  • 60% of ENT surgeons have had an electrosurgical perioral burn during a T&A procedure.1
  • Perioral burns to the mouth and lips occur several times per day in the USA.1
  • Perioral burns are an underreported complication of T&A procedures that can result in severe long-term morbidity.1
  • AEM® Shield™ Technology eliminates these burns, from holes in the insulation and radiant energy, when using monopolar energy.

"*" indicates required fields

Why Shield+?

  • Zero risk of perioral burns – Thanks to AEM® Shield Technology, you’ll never have to worry about this preventable complication caused by insulation failure and radiant monopolar energy.
  • Faster recovery with less re-bleed risk – Shield™+ provides fast, reliable RF hemostasis with fewer risks of complications related to rebleed rates2,3.
  • Clinically efficient – Shield™+ gets the job done, fast, with RF energy.
  • Comparable post-op pain profiles4.
  • No changes to surgical technique and no capital required.
  • Save over $100 per procedure compared to alternate technologies.
  1. Nuara MJ, Park AH, Alder SC, et al. Perioral Burns After Adenotonsillectomy: A Potentially Serious Complication. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;134(1):10-15. doi:10.1001/archoto.2007.5.
  2. Lane JC, Dworkin-Valenti J, Chiodo L, Haupert M. Postoperative tonsillectomy bleeding complications in children: A comparison of three surgical techniques. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;88:184-188. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.07.007
  3. Mösges R, Hellmich M, Allekotte S, Albrecht K, Böhm M. Hemorrhage rate after coblation tonsillectomy: a meta-analysis of published trials. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;268(6):807-816. doi:10.1007/s00405-011-1535-9.
  4. Pynnonen, M., Brinkmeier, J. V., Thorne, M. C., Chong, L. Y., & Burton, M. J. (2017). Coblation versus other surgical techniques for tonsillectomy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(8), CD004619. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004619.pub3