2013Journal of Nanchang UniversityRequires access

Coblation Assisted Tonsillectomy versus Traditional Dissection Tonsillectomy:a Comparison of Postoperative Hemorrhage

Lin Rong-zh

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To compare the operative results and postoperative hemorrhage after coblation assisted tonsillectomy and traditional dissection tonsillectomy,and to provide a basis for tonsillar excision.Methods Data of 1 179patients who underwent traditional dissection tonsillectomy(control group,n=423)or coblation assisted tonsillectomy(observation group,n=756)between January 2008and January 2013were retrospectively analyzed.Operation time,blood loss, incidence of bleeding,reason for bleeding and postoperative recovery time were compared between the two groups.Results Compared with control group,operation time,blood loss and incidence of postoperative bleeding significantly decreased in observation group(P0.05).There was no significant difference in postoperative recovery time between the two groups(P0.05).Conclusion Coblation assisted tonsillectomy can shorten operation time,reduce blood loss and decrease bleeding complications compared with traditional dissection tonsillectomy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To compare the operative results and postoperative hemorrhage after coblation assisted tonsillectomy and traditional dissection tonsillectomy,and to provide a basis for tonsillar excision.Methods Data of 1 179patients who underwent traditional dissection tonsillectomy(control group,n=423)or coblation assisted tonsillectomy(observation group,n=756)between January 2008and January 2013were retrospectively analyzed.Operation time,blood loss, incidence of bleeding,reason for bleeding and postoperative recovery time were compared between the two groups.Results Compared with control group,operation time,blood loss and incidence of postoperative bleeding significantly decreased in observation group(P0.05).There was no significant difference in postoperative recovery time between the two groups(P0.05).Conclusion Coblation assisted tonsillectomy can shorten operation time,reduce blood loss and decrease bleeding complications compared with traditional dissection tonsillectomy.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To compare the operative results and postoperative hemorrhage after coblation assisted tonsillectomy and traditional dissection tonsillectomy,and to provide a basis for tonsillar excision.Methods Data of 1 179patients who underwent traditional dissection tonsillectomy(control group,n=423)or coblation assisted tonsillectomy(observation group,n=756)between January 2008and January 2013were retrospectively analyzed.Operation time,blood loss, incidence of bleeding,reason for bleeding and postoperative recovery time were compared between the two groups.Results Compared with control group,operation time,blood loss and incidence of postoperative bleeding significantly decreased in observation group(P0.05).There was no significant difference in postoperative recovery time between the two groups(P0.05).Conclusion Coblation assisted tonsillectomy can shorten operation time,reduce blood loss and decrease bleeding complications compared with traditional dissection tonsillectomy.

Key concepts: Tonsillectomy, Medicine, Blood loss, Surgery, Dissection (medical), Incidence (geometry), Anesthesia, Significant difference

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Coblation Assisted Tonsillectomy versus Traditional Dissection Tonsillectomy:a Comparison of Postoperative Hemorrhage — Research Paper | ScholarLens