Al-Shehri Ali Maeed S, Alenzi Haifa Lafi Sahej, Ali Mohammed Yazeed Mansour, Musleh Abdullah, Bharti Rishi Kumar, Saeed Munshet Amr Mohammed
Ear, Nose and Throat Division, Surgery Department, College of Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, KSA.
Medical Intern, Northern Border University, Arar, KSA.
J Family Med Prim Care. 2020 Aug 25;9(8):3981-3985. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_84_20. eCollection 2020 Aug.
Tonsillectomy is one of the most frequently applied and oldest surgical procedures in otorhinolaryngology. Various surgical techniques are used to perform this operation including traditional and cauterization techniques.
To assess morbidity and efficacy and compare objectively the techniques in tonsillectomy, i.e., traditional technique and cauterization technique. This study compares the traditional and cauterization tonsillectomy techniques in view of their advantages and complications.
This is a retrospective study and comparative study, conducted during the period from January 2017 to March 2018 from the patients attending to Alnamas General Hospital, Aseer Region, Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire was designed to compare the traditional and cauterization tonsillectomy. Fifty patients underwent traditional technique and fifty patients underwent cauterization method. The data analyzed using SPSS V.16.0 (SPSS Inc; Chicago, IL, USA).
A total of 100 patients, 62 males and 38 females, aged 8 to 16 years were included in the study. A total of 100 patients were enrolled in the study. Traditional and cauterization tonsillectomy were performed. 50 (27 male and 23 female) patients, whose ages ranged from 9 to 16 years old underwent the traditional tonsillectomy, 50 (35 male and 15 female) patients whose ages ranged from 8 to 16 years underwent cauterization. The two groups were similar for demographic parameters. The difference between mean operative times of the two methods was statistically significant. Postoperative bleeding is significantly higher in the traditional technique compared to cauterization method. Postoperative pain is significantly less in cauterization method. Only a few patients experienced fever, bleeding, and other complications related to anesthesia. The bleeding severity is significantly lower in the cauterization technique. Postoperative pain was less in cauterization technique on day 1 and day 5. Postoperative pain was from mild to severe.
This study revealed significantly less postoperative complications in traditional tonsillectomy in comparison with the cauterization method. Healing time was significantly faster in cauterization technique than in traditional method.
扁桃体切除术是耳鼻咽喉科最常用且最古老的外科手术之一。进行该手术使用了各种外科技术，包括传统技术和烧灼技术。
评估扁桃体切除术中的发病率和疗效，并客观比较传统技术和烧灼技术这两种技术。本研究从优点和并发症方面比较传统扁桃体切除术和烧灼扁桃体切除术技术。
这是一项回顾性和比较性研究，于2017年1月至2018年3月期间对沙特阿拉伯阿西尔地区阿尔纳马斯综合医院的患者进行。设计了问卷来比较传统扁桃体切除术和烧灼扁桃体切除术。50例患者接受传统技术，50例患者接受烧灼法。使用SPSS V.16.0（SPSS公司；美国伊利诺伊州芝加哥）分析数据。
本研究共纳入100例患者，年龄在8至16岁之间，其中男性62例，女性38例。总共100例患者参与了研究。进行了传统扁桃体切除术和烧灼扁桃体切除术。50例（男性27例，女性23例）年龄在9至16岁的患者接受了传统扁桃体切除术，50例（男性35例，女性15例）年龄在8至16岁的患者接受了烧灼术。两组在人口统计学参数方面相似。两种方法的平均手术时间差异具有统计学意义。与烧灼法相比，传统技术术后出血明显更高。烧灼法术后疼痛明显较轻。只有少数患者出现发热、出血以及其他与麻醉相关的并发症。烧灼技术的出血严重程度明显较低。烧灼技术在术后第1天和第5天的疼痛较轻。术后疼痛从轻度到重度不等。
本研究表明，与烧灼法相比，传统扁桃体切除术的术后并发症明显更少。烧灼技术的愈合时间比传统方法明显更快。
