Thermal Welding Tonsillectomy versus Monopolar Electrocautery Tonsillectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

IF 0.7 Q4 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-18 DOI:10.4274/tao.2023.2022-11-9
Ebraheem Albazee, Bader Alshammari, Mohammad Alotaibi, Kaushalendra Mani Tripathi, Abdallah Abuawad
{"title":"Thermal Welding Tonsillectomy versus Monopolar Electrocautery Tonsillectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.","authors":"Ebraheem Albazee,&nbsp;Bader Alshammari,&nbsp;Mohammad Alotaibi,&nbsp;Kaushalendra Mani Tripathi,&nbsp;Abdallah Abuawad","doi":"10.4274/tao.2023.2022-11-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In hopes of contributing to the decision about the best surgical option in tonsillectomy, we performed this work to compare the effectiveness of the thermal welding system (TW) and monopolar electrocautery (ME) tonsillectomy in terms of postoperative pain, postoperative bleeding, and operation time in patients undergoing tonsillectomy, to determine which procedure is most expected to enhance the postoperative quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Digital databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, were systematically screened from inception up to October 2022. The included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were evaluated for risk of bias via the Cochrane tool (version 2). The outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference/standardized mean difference (MD/SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The three RCTs that met our criteria were included in the study. Overall, 151 patients had been enrolled in these three RCTs, in which 75 and 76 were allocated to the TW and ME groups, respectively. The postoperative pain levels were substantially reduced, favoring the TW arm over the ME arm [n=2 RCTs, SMD=-0.39, 95% CI (-0.67, -0.12), p=0.005]. Also, the analysis revealed a substantial variation between the TW and ME arms in terms of operation time [n=2 RCTs, MD=3.29 minutes, 95% CI (1.42, 5.17), p=0.0006]. However, the analysis revealed no substantial variation between the TW and ME arms in term of postoperative bleeding [n=3 RCTs, RR=0.40, 95% CI (0.06, 2.62), p=0.34].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis revealed that postoperative bleeding for tonsillectomy were similar between the ME and TW techniques. However, TW showed lower postoperative pain levels than ME statistically but without achieving significant clinical advantage.</p>","PeriodicalId":44240,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e6/c2/tao-61-83.PMC10506519.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Archives of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tao.2023.2022-11-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: In hopes of contributing to the decision about the best surgical option in tonsillectomy, we performed this work to compare the effectiveness of the thermal welding system (TW) and monopolar electrocautery (ME) tonsillectomy in terms of postoperative pain, postoperative bleeding, and operation time in patients undergoing tonsillectomy, to determine which procedure is most expected to enhance the postoperative quality of life.

Methods: Digital databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, were systematically screened from inception up to October 2022. The included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were evaluated for risk of bias via the Cochrane tool (version 2). The outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference/standardized mean difference (MD/SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model.

Results: The three RCTs that met our criteria were included in the study. Overall, 151 patients had been enrolled in these three RCTs, in which 75 and 76 were allocated to the TW and ME groups, respectively. The postoperative pain levels were substantially reduced, favoring the TW arm over the ME arm [n=2 RCTs, SMD=-0.39, 95% CI (-0.67, -0.12), p=0.005]. Also, the analysis revealed a substantial variation between the TW and ME arms in terms of operation time [n=2 RCTs, MD=3.29 minutes, 95% CI (1.42, 5.17), p=0.0006]. However, the analysis revealed no substantial variation between the TW and ME arms in term of postoperative bleeding [n=3 RCTs, RR=0.40, 95% CI (0.06, 2.62), p=0.34].

Conclusion: This meta-analysis revealed that postoperative bleeding for tonsillectomy were similar between the ME and TW techniques. However, TW showed lower postoperative pain levels than ME statistically but without achieving significant clinical advantage.

热焊接扁桃体切除术与单极电切扁桃体切除术:随机临床试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:为了有助于决定扁桃体切除术的最佳手术选择,我们进行了这项工作,以比较热焊接系统(TW)和单极电刀(ME)扁桃体切除术在扁桃体切除术患者术后疼痛、术后出血和手术时间方面的有效性,以确定哪种手术最有望提高术后生活质量。方法:从成立到2022年10月,对包括PubMed、Scopus、Cochrane、Web of Science和Google Scholar在内的数字数据库进行系统筛选。纳入的随机对照试验(RCT)通过Cochrane工具(版本2)评估偏倚风险。在随机效应模型中,结果总结为风险比(RR)或平均差/标准化平均差(MD/SMD),置信区间为95%。结果:符合我们标准的三项随机对照试验被纳入研究。总的来说,这三项随机对照试验共招募了151名患者,其中75名和76名分别被分配到TW组和ME组。术后疼痛水平显著降低,有利于TW组而非ME组[n=2次随机对照试验,SMD=-0.39,95%CI(-0.67,-0.12),p=0.005]。此外,分析显示,TW组和ME组在手术时间方面存在显著差异[n=2次RCT,MD=3.29分钟,95%CI,分析显示,在术后出血方面,TW和ME组之间没有显著差异[n=3个随机对照试验,RR=0.40,95%CI(0.06,2.62),p=0.34]。结论:该荟萃分析显示,ME和TW技术的扁桃体切除术后出血相似。然而,TW在统计学上显示出比ME更低的术后疼痛水平,但没有取得显著的临床优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信