International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology · 2017
Coblation versus microdebrider in pediatric adenoidectomy.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mularczyk Chris, Walner David L, Hamming Katherine K
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare and contrast coblation and microdebrider with touch-up electrocautery (ME) for adenoidectomy in children.
METHODS: Patients <18 years old undergoing adenoidectomy without tonsillectomy were selected for this prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Participants were enrolled into one of two groups based on birth date: coblation or ME. The surgeons completed a standard survey about intraoperative factors for each method. Recovery nurses filled out a standardized survey postoperatively. A third standardized survey was completed via a phone interview with the parent or patient caregiver on postoperative day 3 to assess procedure outcomes. The survey results were then compared using ANOVA statistical analysis.
RESULTS: 50 patients were enrolled in the coblation group and 51 were enrolled in the ME group. There was no significant difference in mean age between the coblation (4.96 years) and ME groups (4.58 years) (p = 0.525). The mean time (in minutes) for coblation (5.50) was significantly lower than ME (9.47) when controlling for the confounder: surgical site exposure (p < 0.001). The surgical time was significantly influenced by the quality of exposure/visualization (p = 0.037). The coblator method had significantly less intraoperative blood loss compared to ME (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference between coblation (1.53) and ME (2.05) for days of pain (p = 0.045) when controlling for the confounder adenoid size.
CONCLUSION: In our study we found that coblation demonstrated significantly less intraoperative time and less blood loss, as well as a shorter duration of postoperative pain, when compared to ME for adenoidectomy.
METHODS: Patients <18 years old undergoing adenoidectomy without tonsillectomy were selected for this prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Participants were enrolled into one of two groups based on birth date: coblation or ME. The surgeons completed a standard survey about intraoperative factors for each method. Recovery nurses filled out a standardized survey postoperatively. A third standardized survey was completed via a phone interview with the parent or patient caregiver on postoperative day 3 to assess procedure outcomes. The survey results were then compared using ANOVA statistical analysis.
RESULTS: 50 patients were enrolled in the coblation group and 51 were enrolled in the ME group. There was no significant difference in mean age between the coblation (4.96 years) and ME groups (4.58 years) (p = 0.525). The mean time (in minutes) for coblation (5.50) was significantly lower than ME (9.47) when controlling for the confounder: surgical site exposure (p < 0.001). The surgical time was significantly influenced by the quality of exposure/visualization (p = 0.037). The coblator method had significantly less intraoperative blood loss compared to ME (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant difference between coblation (1.53) and ME (2.05) for days of pain (p = 0.045) when controlling for the confounder adenoid size.
CONCLUSION: In our study we found that coblation demonstrated significantly less intraoperative time and less blood loss, as well as a shorter duration of postoperative pain, when compared to ME for adenoidectomy.