Maxillofacial Surgery Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43B, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Direction, Hygiene and Hospital Infection Control Operative Unit, University Hospital of Sassari, Via Padre Manzella 4, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Mar;25(1):75-79. doi: 10.1007/s10006-020-00897-w. Epub 2020 Aug 18.
Harmonic instruments are becoming popular in head and neck surgeries. In this prospective, randomized study, the efficacy of the harmonic instruments and electrosurgical technique is compared.
A total of 48 patients undergoing unilateral neck dissection were divided into two groups. In one group, surgery was performed using conventional hemostatic instruments while in the other, only harmonic instruments were used. The two techniques were then compared with regard to intra- and post-operative blood loss, complications in operating time, drain, tracheotomy and nasogastric tube duration, and post-operative hospital stay.
Differences in operative time (P = 0.647), total suction drainage (P = 0.362) and time that drains (P = 0.404), nasogastric tube (P = 0.378), and tracheotomy (P = 0.052) were kept in place and proved not significant. The average blood loss during surgery was significantly greater in the CH group (P = 0.003) as the number of hemoclips and resorbable ligature used (P = 0.002).
In contrast to what has been reported up to now, our study did not reveal a net advantage in the use of harmonic instruments with respect to classical instruments in terms of surgical outcome. On the contrary, harmonic tools had a higher complication rate (i.e., salivary fistula and lymphatic leak) probably due to the decreased ability of this instruments to permanently close glandular structures and lymphatic ducts. In these cases, a closure technique such as electrocautery or classic knot-tying should be used.
谐波仪器在头颈部手术中越来越受欢迎。在这项前瞻性、随机研究中,比较了谐波仪器和电外科技术的效果。
共有 48 例行单侧颈部清扫术的患者被分为两组。一组使用常规止血器械进行手术,另一组仅使用谐波仪器。然后比较两种技术在术中及术后出血量、手术时间、引流管、气管切开和鼻胃管持续时间、术后住院时间方面的差异。
手术时间(P=0.647)、总吸引引流(P=0.362)和引流时间(P=0.404)、鼻胃管(P=0.378)和气管切开(P=0.052)的差异无统计学意义。CH 组术中平均出血量明显大于 CC 组(P=0.003),使用的止血夹和可吸收结扎线数量也明显多于 CC 组(P=0.002)。
与迄今为止的报道相反,我们的研究并没有发现使用谐波仪器相对于传统仪器在手术结果方面有明显的优势。相反,谐波工具的并发症发生率更高(即涎瘘和淋巴漏),可能是由于这些仪器永久性封闭腺结构和淋巴管的能力降低所致。在这些情况下,应使用电烙或经典结扎等封闭技术。