Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:18:25.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of radiofrequency and monopolar electrocautery tonsillectomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 November 2009

F Aksoy
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Haseki Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
O Ozturan
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Haseki Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
B Veyseller
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Haseki Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
Y S Yildirim*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Haseki Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
H Demirhan
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Haseki Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Yavuz Selim Yildirim, Haseki Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kulak Burun Boğaz Kliniği, 34089 Fatih, Istanbul, Turkey. Fax: +90 212 5103701 E-mail: dryavuzselim@yahoo.com

Abstract

Objectives:

To compare the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency and monopolar electrocautery tonsillectomy, regarding operation duration and tonsillectomy morbidity, including post-operative pain and haemorrhage and tonsillar fossa healing, in patients with recurrent chronic tonsillitis.

Study design:

A prospective, randomised, double-blind, controlled clinical study.

Methods:

Fifty patients aged over 10 years who required tonsillectomy were randomly assigned to have one tonsil removed by radiofrequency and the other by monopolar electrocautery. Operation duration, post-operative haemorrhage, post-operative pain and tonsillar fossa wound healing were compared.

Results:

The mean ± standard deviation of the operation duration required for the radiofrequency method was significantly longer than that for monopolar electrocautery: 8.1 ± 1.6 minutes vs 7.3 ± 1.5 minutes, respectively (p = 0.034). Post-operative haemorrhage was observed in only three patients (13.6 per cent). Inter-group analysis showed no significant differences in post-operative pain scores for the radiofrequency vs monopolar electrocautery methods (3.7 ± 1.6 vs 3.3 ± 1.4, respectively; p < 0.126). Inter-group analysis showed that tonsillar fossa wound healing scores evaluated on the fifth, 10th and 14th post-operative days were significantly higher in the radiofrequency group compared with the monopolar electrocautery group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

The present study results indicated that monopolar electrocautery tonsillectomy was superior to radiofrequency tonsillectomy in terms of post-operative tonsillar fossa wound healing; however, both techniques were comparable in terms of post-operative pain.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Ragab, SM. Bipolar radiofrequency dissection tonsillectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;133:961–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Tan, AKL, Hsu, PP, Eng, SP, Ng, YH, Lu, PK, Tan, SM et al. Coblation vs electrocautery tonsillectomy: postoperative recovery in adults. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;135:699703Google ScholarPubMed
3Parsons, SP, Cordes, SR, Comer, B. Comparison of posttonsillectomy pain using the ultrasonic scalpel, coblator and electrocautery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:106–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Friedman, M, LoSavio, P, Ibrahim, H, Ramakrishnan, V. Radiofrequency tonsil reduction: safety, morbidity, and efficacy. Laryngoscope 2003;113:882–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Magdy, EA, Elwany, S, Al-Daly, AS, Abdel-Hadi, M, Morshedy, MA. Coblation tonsillectomy: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, clinical and histopathological comparison with dissection-ligation, monopolar electrocautery and laser tonsillectomies. J Laryngol Otol 2008;122:282–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Noordzij, JP, Affleck, BD. Coblation versus unipolar electrocautery tonsillectomy: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study in adult patients. Laryngoscope 2006;116:1303–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Littlefield, PD, Hall, DJ, Holtel, MR. Radiofrequency excision versus monopolar electrosurgical excision for tonsillectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;133:51–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Shah, UK, Galinkin, J, Chiavacci, R, Briggs, M. Tonsillectomy by means of plasma mediated ablation. Prospective, randomized, blinded comparison with monopolar surgery. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:672–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Bäck, L, Paloheimo, M, Ylikoski, J. Traditional tonsillectomy compared with bipolar radiofrequency thermal ablation tonsillectomy in adults: a pilot study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;127:1106–12CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Leinbach, RF, Markwell, SJ, Colliver, JA, Lin, SY. Hot versus cold tonsillectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:360–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Koltai, PJ, Solares, CA, Koempel, JA, Hirose, K, Abelson, TI, Krakovitz, PR et al. Intracapsular tonsillar reduction (partial tonsillectomy): reviving a historical procedure for obstructive sleep. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:532–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Wexler, DB. Recovery after tonsillectomy: electrodissection vs sharp dissection techniques. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996;114:576–81CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Perkins, J, Dahiya, R. Microdissection needle tonsillectomy and postoperative pain: a pilot study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:1285–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Hall, DJ, Littlefield, PD, Birkmire-Peters, DP, Holtel, MR. Radiofrequency ablation versus electrocautery in tonsillectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:300–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed