Cargando…

Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study

The cold scalpel/scissors (CS) and the monopolar electrocautery (ME) are still the most commonly used instruments for neck dissection in head and neck oncology. However, a direct comparison of these techniques does not exist. This study aims to compare these techniques concerning blood loss, the dec...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Obermeier, Katharina Theresa, Liokatis, Paris, Smolka, Wenko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10020427/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36928769
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31328-x
_version_ 1784908253986029568
author Obermeier, Katharina Theresa
Liokatis, Paris
Smolka, Wenko
author_facet Obermeier, Katharina Theresa
Liokatis, Paris
Smolka, Wenko
author_sort Obermeier, Katharina Theresa
collection PubMed
description The cold scalpel/scissors (CS) and the monopolar electrocautery (ME) are still the most commonly used instruments for neck dissection in head and neck oncology. However, a direct comparison of these techniques does not exist. This study aims to compare these techniques concerning blood loss, the decline of hemoglobin levels, and surgery duration. Data on 200 patients who received tumor resection, neck dissection and either a radial forearm free flap (RFFF)or a primary closure (PC) were examined retrospectively. The patients were divided according to the performed defect closure (RFFF or PC) and the main instrument usedfor the beck dissection (Group 1: RFFF and ME, Group 2: RFFF and CS, Group 3: PC and ME Group 4: PC and CS). The intraoperative blood loss, decline of hemoglobin values and surgery duration were analyzed and compared between the corresponding groups. The patients where the ME was used lost on average 409.93 ml (group 1 vs. 2) and 242.4 ml (group 3 vs. 4) less blood. The median decrease in the hemoglobin levels was by 1.01 g/dL (group 1 vs. 2) and 0.85 g/dL (group 3 vs. 4) lower for the ME. The median surgery duration was by 102 min (group 1 vs. 2) and 83 min (group 3 vs. 4) shorterfor the ME. All differences were statistically significant. Traditional scalpel and scissors used for neck dissection lead to significantly higher blood loss and longer operation time than the monopolar electrocautery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10020427
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100204272023-03-18 Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study Obermeier, Katharina Theresa Liokatis, Paris Smolka, Wenko Sci Rep Article The cold scalpel/scissors (CS) and the monopolar electrocautery (ME) are still the most commonly used instruments for neck dissection in head and neck oncology. However, a direct comparison of these techniques does not exist. This study aims to compare these techniques concerning blood loss, the decline of hemoglobin levels, and surgery duration. Data on 200 patients who received tumor resection, neck dissection and either a radial forearm free flap (RFFF)or a primary closure (PC) were examined retrospectively. The patients were divided according to the performed defect closure (RFFF or PC) and the main instrument usedfor the beck dissection (Group 1: RFFF and ME, Group 2: RFFF and CS, Group 3: PC and ME Group 4: PC and CS). The intraoperative blood loss, decline of hemoglobin values and surgery duration were analyzed and compared between the corresponding groups. The patients where the ME was used lost on average 409.93 ml (group 1 vs. 2) and 242.4 ml (group 3 vs. 4) less blood. The median decrease in the hemoglobin levels was by 1.01 g/dL (group 1 vs. 2) and 0.85 g/dL (group 3 vs. 4) lower for the ME. The median surgery duration was by 102 min (group 1 vs. 2) and 83 min (group 3 vs. 4) shorterfor the ME. All differences were statistically significant. Traditional scalpel and scissors used for neck dissection lead to significantly higher blood loss and longer operation time than the monopolar electrocautery. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10020427/ /pubmed/36928769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31328-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Obermeier, Katharina Theresa
Liokatis, Paris
Smolka, Wenko
Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
title Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
title_full Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
title_short Monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
title_sort monopolar electrocautery versus sharp dissection in the neck dissection: a retrospective study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10020427/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36928769
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-31328-x
work_keys_str_mv AT obermeierkatharinatheresa monopolarelectrocauteryversussharpdissectionintheneckdissectionaretrospectivestudy
AT liokatisparis monopolarelectrocauteryversussharpdissectionintheneckdissectionaretrospectivestudy
AT smolkawenko monopolarelectrocauteryversussharpdissectionintheneckdissectionaretrospectivestudy