首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head Neck Surgery >A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study of Coblation versus Dissection Tonsillectomy in Adult Patients
【2h】

A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study of Coblation versus Dissection Tonsillectomy in Adult Patients

机译:成年患者消融与夹层扁桃体切除术的前瞻性随机双盲研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This randomized double blind study was conducted prospectively to determine whether coblation tonsillectomy fared better than the conventional dissection method in terms of postoperative pain, bleeding, and rapidity of healing in adult Indian patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Sixty adult patients undergoing tonsillectomy for benign indications were randomized to have one tonsil removed by subcapsular radiofrequency ablation method and the other by conventional dissection method. The operative time and blood loss was noted for each side. Patients were evaluated at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 h and then on 7th and 20th postoperative day for postoperative pain (by visual analog scale), bleeding, and tonsillar fossa healing. Statistical comparison was done using appropriate tests. The two groups were demographically matched. It took longer to perform the coblation procedure (15 vs 11 min) (P > 0.05). The operative blood loss on the radiofrequency side was 11 ml, vs 34 ml on the conventional side (P = 0.009). 77% patients said that the coblation side was less painful for the overall 20-day recovery period. There were significant differences seen at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h in terms of postoperative pain scores. Beyond that, the pain was consistently less on the coblation side, but the difference was not significant. There was no case of reactionary or secondary hemorrhage in either arm. The healing took longer on the radiofrequency side. Coblation tonsillectomy is an easy to learn technique with significantly reduced operative blood loss and postoperative pain. Longer operative times maybe further reduced with experience.
机译:前瞻性地进行了这项随机双盲研究,以确定在成人扁桃体切除术的印度患者中,消融扁桃体切除术在术后疼痛,出血和愈合速度方面是否比常规解剖方法更好。将60例因良性适应症而接受扁桃体切除术的成年患者随机分组,其中一种通过扁桃体下射频消融方法去除扁桃体,另一部分通过常规解剖方法去除扁桃体。记录每一侧的手术时间和失血量。在术后第6、12、24、48、72小时对患者进行评估,然后在术后第7天和第20天评估术后疼痛(通过视觉模拟量表),出血和扁桃体窝愈合。使用适当的测试进行统计比较。两组在人口统计学上是匹配的。进行消融手术花费的时间更长(15 vs 11分钟)(P> 0.05)。射频侧的手术失血量为11毫升,而常规侧的失血量为34毫升(P = 0.009)。 77%的患者说,在整个20天的恢复期内,消融方的痛苦较小。就术后疼痛评分而言,在6、12、24、48和72小时有明显差异。除此之外,在消融方面的疼痛持续减轻,但差异不明显。两组均无反应性或继发性出血病例。射频治疗的时间更长。消融扁桃体切除术是一种易于学习的技术,可显着减少手术失血量和术后疼痛。有经验的话,更长的手术时间可能会进一步减少。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号