{"title":"Comparison of Colorado Needle Electrocautery and Traditional Scalpel for Lower Eyelid Blepharoplasty Incision: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Chatchai Pruksapong, Suttisun Jankajorn, Chairat Burusapat, Akaradech Attainsee, Nutthapong Wanichjaroen, Nuttadon Wongprakob, Kolid Siriwattana","doi":"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lower eyelid blepharoplasty is one of the most popular aesthetic procedures. Electrocautery provides a hemostatic benefit for skin incision; however, its effect on scar cosmesis remains unclear, particularly in Asian skin types. We compared the Colorado needle electrocautery (pure-cutting mode) versus the traditional scalpel in terms of efficacy, complications, and cosmetic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective intraindividual randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of Colorado needle electrocautery and scalpel in lower blepharoplasty. The study outcomes were scar quality at different times until 1 year postoperatively, bleeding during incision, and postoperative ecchymosis. Scar quality was evaluated using 3 standard scar ratings: the Vancouver Scar Scale, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, and Hollander wound evaluation scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 25 patients, and the electrocautery side had less blood loss during incision than the scalpel side (2.6 ± 0.65 versus 5.28 ± 0.68 sticks; <i>P</i> < 0.001). The electrocautery side had less postoperative ecchymosis (<i>P</i> < 0.001); however, 1-year scar quality was not statistically significant between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Colorado needle electrocautery pure-cutting mode can be an alternative to the traditional scalpel for lower eyelid blepharoplasty skin incision because of long-term scar quality. Electrocautery also has hemostatic benefits, leading to a decrease in intraoperative and postoperative bleeding.</p>","PeriodicalId":20149,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","volume":"12 11","pages":"e6325"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11596443/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Lower eyelid blepharoplasty is one of the most popular aesthetic procedures. Electrocautery provides a hemostatic benefit for skin incision; however, its effect on scar cosmesis remains unclear, particularly in Asian skin types. We compared the Colorado needle electrocautery (pure-cutting mode) versus the traditional scalpel in terms of efficacy, complications, and cosmetic outcomes.
Methods: A prospective intraindividual randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of Colorado needle electrocautery and scalpel in lower blepharoplasty. The study outcomes were scar quality at different times until 1 year postoperatively, bleeding during incision, and postoperative ecchymosis. Scar quality was evaluated using 3 standard scar ratings: the Vancouver Scar Scale, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, and Hollander wound evaluation scale.
Results: The study included 25 patients, and the electrocautery side had less blood loss during incision than the scalpel side (2.6 ± 0.65 versus 5.28 ± 0.68 sticks; P < 0.001). The electrocautery side had less postoperative ecchymosis (P < 0.001); however, 1-year scar quality was not statistically significant between the groups.
Conclusions: Colorado needle electrocautery pure-cutting mode can be an alternative to the traditional scalpel for lower eyelid blepharoplasty skin incision because of long-term scar quality. Electrocautery also has hemostatic benefits, leading to a decrease in intraoperative and postoperative bleeding.
期刊介绍:
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open is an open access, peer reviewed, international journal focusing on global plastic and reconstructive surgery.Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open publishes on all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including basic science/experimental studies pertinent to the field and also clinical articles on such topics as: breast reconstruction, head and neck surgery, pediatric and craniofacial surgery, hand and microsurgery, wound healing, and cosmetic and aesthetic surgery. Clinical studies, experimental articles, ideas and innovations, and techniques and case reports are all welcome article types. Manuscript submission is open to all surgeons, researchers, and other health care providers world-wide who wish to communicate their research results on topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Furthermore, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open, a complimentary journal to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, provides an open access venue for the publication of those research studies sponsored by private and public funding agencies that require open access publication of study results. Its mission is to disseminate high quality, peer reviewed research in plastic and reconstructive surgery to the widest possible global audience, through an open access platform. As an open access journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open offers its content for free to any viewer. Authors of articles retain their copyright to the materials published. Additionally, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open provides rapid review and publication of accepted papers.