Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Wound complications and clinical results of electrocautery versus a scalpel to create a cutaneous flap in thyroidectomy: A prospective randomized trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The use of electrocautery for tissue dissection is becoming increasingly popular, despite the associated risk of poor wound healing and excessive scarring. We conducted this study to compare the wound complications and early and late clinical results resulting from electrocautery versus the scalpel to create a cutaneous flap during thyroidectomy.

Methods

The subjects of this study were 100 patients, randomized prospectively to either a scalpel group (group S, n = 50) or an electrocautery group (group E, n = 50).

Results

Thickness of tissue damage, postoperative thickness of the flap, discomfort in the neck 7 days after surgery, and hypoesthesia and paresthesia in the neck 3 months after surgery were significantly higher in group E than in group S. There were no significant differences in overall postoperative wound complications, postoperative pain, satisfaction with the cosmetic result, or overall outcome of the operation between the groups. Although the incidence of seroma was higher in group E (20%) than in group S (8%), the difference was not significant.

Conclusion

Although electrocautery was associated with increased histological tissue damage, postoperative flap edema, discomfort, and other complications in the early stage, the clinical and cosmetic results of flaps made using electrocautery or a scalpel were similar and satisfactory 6 months after surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Miccoli P, Minuto MN, Ugolini C, Pisano R, Fosso A, Berti P. Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy for benign thyroid disease: an evidence-based review. World J Surg 2008;32:1333–1340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ruggieri M, Zullino A, Straniero A, Maiuolo A, Fumarola A, Vietri F, et al. Is minimally invasive surgery appropriate for small differentiated thyroid carcinomas? Surg Today 2010;40:418–422.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Miccoli P, Berti P, Frustaci GL, Ambrosini CE, Materazzi G. Video-assisted thyroidectomy: indications and results. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2006;391:68–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lombardi CP, Raffaelli M, Princi P, De Crea C, Bellantone R. Video-assisted thyroidectomy: report on the experience of a single center in more than four hundred cases. World J Surg 2006;30:794–800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Terris DJ, Seybt MW, Elchoufi M, Chin E. Cosmetic thyroid surgery: defining the essential principles. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1168–1172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chrysos E, Athanasakis E, Antonakakis S, Xynos E, Zoras O. A prospective study comparing diathermy and scalpel incisions in tension-free inguinal hernioplasty. Am Surg 2005;71:326–329.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yamamoto D, Yamada M, Okugawa H, Yonekura Y, Tanaka K. A comparison between electrocautery and scalpel plus scissor in breast conserving surgery. Oncol Rep 2003;10:1729–1732.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Groot G, Chappell EW. Electrocautery used to create incisions does not increase wound infection rates. Am J Surg 1994;167:601–603.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Barbaros U, Erbil Y, Aksakal N, Citlak G, Isever H, Bozbora A, et al. Electrocautery for cutaneous flap creation during thyroidectomy: a randomised, controlled study. J Laryngol Otol 2008;122:1343–1348.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Porter KA, O’Connor S, Rimm E, Lopez M. Electrocautery as a factor in seroma formation following mastectomy. Am J Surg 1998;176:8–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sheen-Chen SM, Chou FF. A comparison between scalpel and electrocautery in modified radical mastectomy. Eur J Surg 1993;159:457–459.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kearns SR, Connolly EM, McNally S, McNamara DA, Deasy J. Randomized clinical trial of diathermy versus scalpel incision in elective midline laparotomy. Br J Surg 2001;88:41–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gelman CL, Barroso EG, Britton CT, Haklin MF, Staren ED. The effect of lasers, electrocautery, and sharp dissection on cutaneous flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;94:829–833.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Liboon J, Funkhouser W, Terris DJ. A comparison of mucosal incisions made by scalpel, CO2 laser, electrocautery, and constant-voltage electrocautery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;116:379–385.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Reeve T, Thompson NW. Complications of thyroid surgery: how to avoid them, how to manage them, and observations on their possible effect on the whole patient. World J Surg 2000;24:971–975.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rosato L, Avenia N, Bernante P, De Palma M, Gulino G, Nasi PG, et al. Complications of thyroid surgery: analysis of a multicentric study on 14,934 patients operated on in Italy over 5 years. World J Surg 2004;28:271–276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Thomusch O, Machens A, Sekulla C, Ukkat J, Lippert H, Gastinger I, et al. Multivariate analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications in benign goiter surgery: prospective multicenter study in Germany. World J Surg 2000;24:1335–1341.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lennard TWJ. Complications of thyroid surgery. In: Mazzaferri EL, Harmer C, Mallick UK, Kendall-Taylor P, editors. Practical management of thyroid cancer. 1st ed. London: Springer; 2006. p. 165–170.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Sanders LE, Rossi RL, Cady B. Surgical complications and their treatment. In: Cady B, Rossi RL, editors. Surgery of the thyroid and parathyroid glands. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders International; 1991. p. 326–336.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Schwabegger A, Ninkovic M, Brenner E, Anderl H. Seroma as a common donor site morbidity after harvesting the latissimus dorsi flap: observations on cause and prevention. Ann Plast Surg 1997;38:594–597.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bellantone R, Lombardi CP, Bossola M, Boscherini M, De Crea C, Alesina PF, et al. Video-assisted vs conventional thyroid lobectomy: a randomized trial. Arch Surg 2002;137:301–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarwis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999:20:250–278.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ikeda Y, Takami H, Sasaki Y, Takayama J, Niimi M, Kan S. Clinical benefits in endoscopic thyroidectomy by the axillary approach. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:189–195.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Arends MJ, Wyllie AH. Apoptosis: mechanisms and roles in pathology. Int Rev Exp Pathol 1991;32:223–254.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Fukuda Y, Ito Y, Azumi H, Eid NA, Li ZL, Marumo M, et al. Cell death and proliferation in Nd-YAG laser, electrocautery, and scalpel wounds on mice skin. J Dermatol Sci 2002;28:106–118.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Bergamaschi R, Becouarn G, Ronceray J, Arnaud JP. Morbidity of thyroid surgery. Am J Surg 1998;176:71–75.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Dionigi G, Rovera F, Boni L, Castano P, Dionigi R. Surgical site infections after thyroidectomy. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2006;7suppl 2:117–120.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dionigi G, Rovera F, Boni L, Dionigi R. Surveillance of surgical site infections after thyroidectomy in a one-day surgery setting. Int J Surg 2008;6suppl 1:s13–s15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ozlem N, Ozdogan M, Gurer A, Gomceli I, Aydin R. Should the thyroid bed be drained after thyroidectomy? Langenbecks Arch Surg 2006;391:228–230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ayyash K, Khammash M, Tibblin S. Drain vs. no drain in primary thyroid and parathyroid surgery. Eur J Surg 1991;157:113–114.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Samraj K, Gurusamy KS. Wound drains following thyroid surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;17:CD006099.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Graney DO. Anatomy. In: Cummings CW, Fredrickson JM, Harker LA, Krause CJ, Schuller DE, editors. Otolaryngology — head and neck surgery. 1st ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1986. p. 1573–1586.

    Google Scholar 

  33. O’Connell DA, Diamond C, Seikaly H, Harris JR. Objective and subjective scar aesthetics in minimal access vs conventional access parathyroidectomy and thyroidectomy surgical procedures: a paired cohort study. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;134:85–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Böhm B, Minner S, Engelhardt T, Rödiger H. Long-term cosmetic results following thyroid resection. Chirurg 2005;76:54–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Second Department of General Surgery, Sisli Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mehmet Uludag & Gurkan Yetkin

  2. Department of Radiology, Sisli Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Alper Ozel

  3. Department of Pathology, Sisli Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    M. Banu Yilmaz Ozguven & Senay Yener

  4. Halic University Health Sciences Institute, Istanbul, Turkey

    Adnan Isgor

  5. Atakent Mah. 3. Etap, Blok: D21/1, D:1, Kucukcekmece, Istanbul, 34303, Turkey

    Mehmet Uludag

Authors
  1. Mehmet Uludag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gurkan Yetkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alper Ozel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Banu Yilmaz Ozguven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Senay Yener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Adnan Isgor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Uludag, M., Yetkin, G., Ozel, A. et al. Wound complications and clinical results of electrocautery versus a scalpel to create a cutaneous flap in thyroidectomy: A prospective randomized trial. Surg Today 41, 1041–1048 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-010-4435-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-010-4435-5

Key words

Search

Navigation