Dissection Method and Diathermy Cauterization in Tonsillectomy- A Hospital Based Comparative Study

Md Shafiq Ur Rahman, Nripendra Nath Biswas, Debabrota Roy, Shahbub Alam, Mohammad Saneat Jahan Khan
{"title":"Dissection Method and Diathermy Cauterization in Tonsillectomy- A Hospital Based Comparative Study","authors":"Md Shafiq Ur Rahman, Nripendra Nath Biswas, Debabrota Roy, Shahbub Alam, Mohammad Saneat Jahan Khan","doi":"10.3329/bsmmcj.v2i1.69597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tonsillectomy is one of the most common procedures performed by otolaryngologists. It is a surgical operation that removes both palatine tonsils from the tonsillar fossa. It is typically performed in youngers for recurrent tonsillitis and tonsillar hypertrophy. This study was done to compare the dissection and diathermy methods of tonsillectomy and evaluate their advantages and disadvantages during surgery and convalescence. This study was a retrospective analysis of 400 patients from January 2015 to January 2020 in Otorhinolaryngology and Head-Neck Surgery department of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical College Hospital, Faridpur. Out of 400 patients 200 patients underwent tonsillectomy by dissection method and rest 200 patients underwent electrocautery method. Total 400 patients were analyzed separately their hospital stay, blood loss per-operatively, complications in each method and overall outcome of the patients. The overall hospital staying in both types was 1-3 days. The average intra operative blood loss was 5-7 ml in cautery and average 50 ml in dissection method. The average operative time was 25-30 minutes in dissection method and 10-15 minutes was in electrocautery. We found higher amounts of blood loss and intra - operative time in dissection method than electrocautery. The chance of secondary haemorrhage was more in electrocautery method than dissection method. Pain, scar formation, odynophagia were more in cauterization method. Complete healing time was more in cauterization method than dissection method. There was no death in both methods. Although per-operative blood loss, operation time were less in cauterization method but post operative bleeding, pain, odynophagia and infection were more in electro cauterization method. In both methods, there were some advantages and some disadvantages. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Med. Coll. J. 2023;2(1): 40-44","PeriodicalId":8681,"journal":{"name":"Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/bsmmcj.v2i1.69597","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tonsillectomy is one of the most common procedures performed by otolaryngologists. It is a surgical operation that removes both palatine tonsils from the tonsillar fossa. It is typically performed in youngers for recurrent tonsillitis and tonsillar hypertrophy. This study was done to compare the dissection and diathermy methods of tonsillectomy and evaluate their advantages and disadvantages during surgery and convalescence. This study was a retrospective analysis of 400 patients from January 2015 to January 2020 in Otorhinolaryngology and Head-Neck Surgery department of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical College Hospital, Faridpur. Out of 400 patients 200 patients underwent tonsillectomy by dissection method and rest 200 patients underwent electrocautery method. Total 400 patients were analyzed separately their hospital stay, blood loss per-operatively, complications in each method and overall outcome of the patients. The overall hospital staying in both types was 1-3 days. The average intra operative blood loss was 5-7 ml in cautery and average 50 ml in dissection method. The average operative time was 25-30 minutes in dissection method and 10-15 minutes was in electrocautery. We found higher amounts of blood loss and intra - operative time in dissection method than electrocautery. The chance of secondary haemorrhage was more in electrocautery method than dissection method. Pain, scar formation, odynophagia were more in cauterization method. Complete healing time was more in cauterization method than dissection method. There was no death in both methods. Although per-operative blood loss, operation time were less in cauterization method but post operative bleeding, pain, odynophagia and infection were more in electro cauterization method. In both methods, there were some advantages and some disadvantages. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Med. Coll. J. 2023;2(1): 40-44
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解剖法与透热烧灼法在扁桃体切除术中的比较研究
扁桃体切除术是耳鼻喉科医生最常用的手术之一。这是一种从扁桃体窝切除腭扁桃体的外科手术。它通常用于复发性扁桃体炎和扁桃体肥大的年轻人。本研究比较了扁桃体切除术的解剖和热疗方法,并评价了它们在手术和恢复期的优缺点。本研究回顾性分析了2015年1月至2020年1月在法里德普尔邦班班胡谢赫穆吉布医学院附属医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科的400例患者。400例患者中200例采用解剖法切除扁桃体,其余200例采用电灼法切除扁桃体。分别分析400例患者的住院时间、术中出血量、各种方法的并发症及患者的总体预后。两种类型的总住院时间为1-3天。烧灼法平均术中出血量5 ~ 7ml,夹层法平均50 ml。解剖法平均手术时间25 ~ 30分钟,电灼法平均手术时间10 ~ 15分钟。我们发现解剖术的出血量和术中时间比电灼术高。电灼法继发出血的几率高于解剖法。烧灼法以疼痛、瘢痕形成、咽痛为主。烧灼法比解剖法完全愈合时间长。两种方法均无死亡病例。烧灼法虽然术中出血量、手术时间较少,但电烧灼法术后出血、疼痛、咽痛、感染较多。两种方法各有优缺点。Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Med. col。[j] .生物工程学报;2009;2(1):40-44
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Current Trends of Alternatives to Hysterectomy in Adenomyosis: A Review Article Dissection Method and Diathermy Cauterization in Tonsillectomy- A Hospital Based Comparative Study Diaphragmatic Hernia (Bochdalek Hernia) in an Adult: a Case Report Outcomes of Patients with COVID-19 in a Tertiary Care Hospital of Bangladesh Risk Factors of Birth Defects: A Case-control Study in a Tertiary Level Hospital
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1