Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-ffbbcc459-h7vld Total loading time: 0.233 Render date: 2022-03-14T19:51:04.617Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Diathermy tonsillectomy: comparisons of morbidity following bipolar and monopolar microdissection needle excision

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

A. Akkielah
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, The Royal Hospitals Trust, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
A. Kalan
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, The Royal Hospitals Trust, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
G. S. Kenyon*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, The Royal Hospitals Trust, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
*
Address for correspondence: Mr G. S. Kenyon, Department of Otolaryngology, The Royal Hospitals Trust, St Bartholomew's Hospital, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE.

Abstract

Tonsillectomy is frequently associated with a considerable post-operative morbidity. In some cases reactionary or secondary haemorrhage occurs and all patients suffer a degree of post-operative pain. The use of bipolar diathermy excision has become popular because it reduces intra-operative blood loss, but all diathermy inevitably produces a degree of damage to adjacent normal soft tissues. In turn this inadvertent injury must act to increase the post-operative pain.

Monopolar dissection using a fine tungsten diathermy needle (the Colorado needle) allows sharp dissection at low power levels and in previous studies has been shown to produce a reduction in collateral tissue damage. In this prospective study the morbidity associated with tonsillectomy using this needle was compared to that following a standard bipolar dissection.

Using the monopolar needle produced no enhanced risk of reactionary or secondary haemorrhage while causing significantly less post-operative pain and a reduction in eschar. We believe that excision using this needle preserves the advantages associated with bipolar dissection while reducing local soft tissue damage.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bluestone, C. D. (1977) Status of tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. Laryngoscope 87: 12351243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choy, A. T. K., Su, A. P. (1992) Bipolar diathermy or ligation for haemostasis in tonsillectomy? A prospective study on post-operative pain. Journal of Laryngology and Otology 106: 2122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farnworth, T. K., Beals, S. P., Manwaring, K. H., Trepeta, R. W. (1993) Comparison of skin necrosis in rats using a new microdissection electrocautery, standard size needle electrocautery and the Shaw hemostatic scalpel. Annals of Plastic Surgery 31 (2): 164167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goycoolea, M. V., Cubillos, P. M., Martinez, G. C. (1982) Tonsillectomy with a suction coagulator. Laryngoscope 92: 818819.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Handler, S. D., Miller, L., Richmond, K. H., Corso Baranak, C. (1986) Post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage: incidence, prevention and management. Laryngoscopy 96: 12431247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Husband, A. D., Davis, A. (1996) Pain after tonsillectomy. Clinical Otolaryngology 21; 99101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kristensen, S., Tveteras, K. (1984) Post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage: a retrospective study of 1,150 operations. Clinical Otolaryngology 9: 347350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, D. G., St George, C., Granoff, D., Scheiner, E., Imber, P., Mlynarczyk, F. A. (1984) Tonsillectomy – some like it hot. Laryngoscope 94: 677679.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAuliffe, C. J. (1987) The history of tonsil and adenoid surgery. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 20: 415419.Google Scholar
Weimert, T. A., Babyak, J. W., Bichter, H. J. (1990) Electrodissection tonsillectomy. Archives of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 116: 186188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Diathermy tonsillectomy: comparisons of morbidity following bipolar and monopolar microdissection needle excision
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Diathermy tonsillectomy: comparisons of morbidity following bipolar and monopolar microdissection needle excision
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Diathermy tonsillectomy: comparisons of morbidity following bipolar and monopolar microdissection needle excision
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *