Harmonic Scalpel Tonsillectomy Versus Coblation Tonsillectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of coblation versus harmonic scalpel methods among patients undergoing tonsillectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were systematically screened from inception until October 2022. The outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference/standardized mean difference (MD/SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were analyzed, encompassing a sum of 461 patients (harmonic scalpel = 233 patients and coblation = 228 patients). The overall quality assessment was low risk of bias in two RCTs, some concerns of bias in three RCTs, and high risk of bias in one RCT. There was no significant difference between harmonic scalpel and coblation groups regarding the mean operative time (n = 6 RCTs, MD=-7.45 min, 95% CI [-15.26, 0.01], p = 0.06) mean intraoperative blood loss (n = 5 RCTs, MD=-36.03 ml, 95% CI [-77.46, 5.41], p = 0.09), and rate of postoperative hemorrhage (n = 5 RCTs, RR = 0.59, 95% CI [0.25, 1.39], p = 0.23). The overall postoperative pain score was significantly reduced in favor of the coblation group compared with the harmonic scalpel group (n = 5 RCTs, MD = 0.40, 95% CI [0.10, 0.69], p = 0.009)".

CONCLUSIONS

The harmonic scalpel and coblation techniques share equal efficacy among patients undergoing tonsillectomy. The reduction in postoperative pain score provided by the coblation method is not clinically meaningful in clinical practice. Additional RCTs are needed to consolidate the power and quality of the presented evidence.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-023-04022-7.