Use of ultrasonic scalpel and monopolar electrocautery for skin incisions in neck dissection: a prospective randomized trial

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of ultrasonic scalpel and monopolar electrocautery for skin incisions in neck dissection: a prospective randomized trial

AU - Schneider, Daniel

AU - Goppold, Kai

AU - Kaemmerer, Peer W

AU - Schoen, Gerhard

AU - Woehlke, Michael

AU - Bschorer, Reinhard

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - PURPOSE: Ultrasonic scalpel (UC) and monopolar electrocautery (ME) are standard equipment for soft tissue surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare intraoperative and postoperative patterns of patients using either UC or ME for skin incisions in neck dissection.MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective randomized study of 30 patients, the thermal effects of UC (n = 15) and ME (n = 15) were examined using real-time infrared thermographic imaging. Additionally, tissue damage was evaluated histopathologically. The other measured variables were operation and bleeding time, postoperative pain score (only neck incision area), in-patient time, and complications.RESULTS: UC significantly reduces the thermal effects, compared to ME (p < 0.001). The mean depth of tissue damage (i.e., necrosis) was 272.7 μm for UC and 284.7 μm for ME with no significant difference (p = 0.285). From the third postoperative day, patients treated using UC had noticeably less pain in the neck incision area (t3 p = 0.010; t4 p < 0.001; t5 p < 0.005). Cutting time was reduced for ME by 36.1 s (p < 0.001) and the bleeding time was decreased by 40.9 s for UC (p < 0.001). The total preparation time was the same (p = 0.402). When comparing in-patient time (p = 0.723), as well as complications, no significant differences were seen.CONCLUSION: UC results in less postoperative pain and less bleeding in the neck incision area. Accordingly, UC is superior to ME for skin incisions in neck dissection.

AB - PURPOSE: Ultrasonic scalpel (UC) and monopolar electrocautery (ME) are standard equipment for soft tissue surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare intraoperative and postoperative patterns of patients using either UC or ME for skin incisions in neck dissection.MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective randomized study of 30 patients, the thermal effects of UC (n = 15) and ME (n = 15) were examined using real-time infrared thermographic imaging. Additionally, tissue damage was evaluated histopathologically. The other measured variables were operation and bleeding time, postoperative pain score (only neck incision area), in-patient time, and complications.RESULTS: UC significantly reduces the thermal effects, compared to ME (p < 0.001). The mean depth of tissue damage (i.e., necrosis) was 272.7 μm for UC and 284.7 μm for ME with no significant difference (p = 0.285). From the third postoperative day, patients treated using UC had noticeably less pain in the neck incision area (t3 p = 0.010; t4 p < 0.001; t5 p < 0.005). Cutting time was reduced for ME by 36.1 s (p < 0.001) and the bleeding time was decreased by 40.9 s for UC (p < 0.001). The total preparation time was the same (p = 0.402). When comparing in-patient time (p = 0.723), as well as complications, no significant differences were seen.CONCLUSION: UC results in less postoperative pain and less bleeding in the neck incision area. Accordingly, UC is superior to ME for skin incisions in neck dissection.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1007/s10006-018-0686-x

DO - 10.1007/s10006-018-0686-x

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 29492789

VL - 22

SP - 169

EP - 175

JO - ORAL MAXILLOFAC SURG

JF - ORAL MAXILLOFAC SURG

SN - 1865-1550

IS - 2

ER -