A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy

Michael Mcnally, Steven C. Agle, R. Fredrick Williams, Walter E. Pofahl

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Safe thyroid surgery requires meticulous hemostasis. The objective of the current study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of ultrasonic dissection (UD) and electronic vessel sealing (EVS) in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Between January 1, 2007 and January 25, 2008, hemostasis was achieved using EVS (LigaSure Precise, Valleylab, Boulder, CO). Since January 25, 2008, hemostasis has been achieved using UD (Harmonic Focus, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH). Operative time, estimated blood loss, gland weight, and postoperative complications were compared. Differences were analyzed using unpaired t test and Chi square with significance assigned P < 0.05. Seventy-four patients underwent total thyroidectomy (EVS n = 59, UD n = 15). Operative time (EVS 115.0 ± 38.3 min, UD 88.0 ± 14.0 min, P = 0.012) was significantly decreased in the UD group compared with the EVS group. There were no significant differences in mean age (EVS 50.4 ± 13.9 years, UD 49.1 ± 15.6 years), gender distribution (EVS 78% female, UD 87% female), estimated blood loss (EVS 49.4 ± 44.7 mL, UD 47.0 ± 70.4 mL), and gland weight (EVS 67.4 ± 66.4 gm, UD 41.3 ± 26.6 gm). Analysis of complications, including hematoma, hypocalcemia, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy showed no significant difference. Based on the current analysis, ultrasonic dissection is a safe method of hemostasis for thyroid surgery. Its use decreases operative time when compared with electronic vessel sealing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1073-1076
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican Surgeon
Volume75
Issue number11
StatePublished - Nov 1 2009

Fingerprint

Thyroidectomy
Hemostasis
Ultrasonics
Dissection
Operative Time
Thyroid Gland
Vocal Cord Paralysis
Hypocalcemia
Chi-Square Distribution
Carbon Monoxide
Hematoma
Weight Loss
Databases
Safety
Weights and Measures

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

Mcnally, M., Agle, S. C., Williams, R. F., & Pofahl, W. E. (2009). A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy. American Surgeon, 75(11), 1073-1076.

A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy. / Mcnally, Michael; Agle, Steven C.; Williams, R. Fredrick; Pofahl, Walter E.

In: American Surgeon, Vol. 75, No. 11, 01.11.2009, p. 1073-1076.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mcnally, M, Agle, SC, Williams, RF & Pofahl, WE 2009, 'A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy', American Surgeon, vol. 75, no. 11, pp. 1073-1076.
Mcnally M, Agle SC, Williams RF, Pofahl WE. A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy. American Surgeon. 2009 Nov 1;75(11):1073-1076.
Mcnally, Michael ; Agle, Steven C. ; Williams, R. Fredrick ; Pofahl, Walter E. / A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy. In: American Surgeon. 2009 ; Vol. 75, No. 11. pp. 1073-1076.
@article{682f0f5160f04efe820018bbd4134a74,
title = "A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy",
abstract = "Safe thyroid surgery requires meticulous hemostasis. The objective of the current study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of ultrasonic dissection (UD) and electronic vessel sealing (EVS) in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Between January 1, 2007 and January 25, 2008, hemostasis was achieved using EVS (LigaSure Precise, Valleylab, Boulder, CO). Since January 25, 2008, hemostasis has been achieved using UD (Harmonic Focus, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH). Operative time, estimated blood loss, gland weight, and postoperative complications were compared. Differences were analyzed using unpaired t test and Chi square with significance assigned P < 0.05. Seventy-four patients underwent total thyroidectomy (EVS n = 59, UD n = 15). Operative time (EVS 115.0 ± 38.3 min, UD 88.0 ± 14.0 min, P = 0.012) was significantly decreased in the UD group compared with the EVS group. There were no significant differences in mean age (EVS 50.4 ± 13.9 years, UD 49.1 ± 15.6 years), gender distribution (EVS 78{\%} female, UD 87{\%} female), estimated blood loss (EVS 49.4 ± 44.7 mL, UD 47.0 ± 70.4 mL), and gland weight (EVS 67.4 ± 66.4 gm, UD 41.3 ± 26.6 gm). Analysis of complications, including hematoma, hypocalcemia, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy showed no significant difference. Based on the current analysis, ultrasonic dissection is a safe method of hemostasis for thyroid surgery. Its use decreases operative time when compared with electronic vessel sealing.",
author = "Michael Mcnally and Agle, {Steven C.} and Williams, {R. Fredrick} and Pofahl, {Walter E.}",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "75",
pages = "1073--1076",
journal = "American Surgeon",
issn = "0003-1348",
publisher = "Southeastern Surgical Congress",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of two methods of hemostasis in thyroidectomy

AU - Mcnally, Michael

AU - Agle, Steven C.

AU - Williams, R. Fredrick

AU - Pofahl, Walter E.

PY - 2009/11/1

Y1 - 2009/11/1

N2 - Safe thyroid surgery requires meticulous hemostasis. The objective of the current study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of ultrasonic dissection (UD) and electronic vessel sealing (EVS) in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Between January 1, 2007 and January 25, 2008, hemostasis was achieved using EVS (LigaSure Precise, Valleylab, Boulder, CO). Since January 25, 2008, hemostasis has been achieved using UD (Harmonic Focus, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH). Operative time, estimated blood loss, gland weight, and postoperative complications were compared. Differences were analyzed using unpaired t test and Chi square with significance assigned P < 0.05. Seventy-four patients underwent total thyroidectomy (EVS n = 59, UD n = 15). Operative time (EVS 115.0 ± 38.3 min, UD 88.0 ± 14.0 min, P = 0.012) was significantly decreased in the UD group compared with the EVS group. There were no significant differences in mean age (EVS 50.4 ± 13.9 years, UD 49.1 ± 15.6 years), gender distribution (EVS 78% female, UD 87% female), estimated blood loss (EVS 49.4 ± 44.7 mL, UD 47.0 ± 70.4 mL), and gland weight (EVS 67.4 ± 66.4 gm, UD 41.3 ± 26.6 gm). Analysis of complications, including hematoma, hypocalcemia, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy showed no significant difference. Based on the current analysis, ultrasonic dissection is a safe method of hemostasis for thyroid surgery. Its use decreases operative time when compared with electronic vessel sealing.

AB - Safe thyroid surgery requires meticulous hemostasis. The objective of the current study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of ultrasonic dissection (UD) and electronic vessel sealing (EVS) in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Between January 1, 2007 and January 25, 2008, hemostasis was achieved using EVS (LigaSure Precise, Valleylab, Boulder, CO). Since January 25, 2008, hemostasis has been achieved using UD (Harmonic Focus, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH). Operative time, estimated blood loss, gland weight, and postoperative complications were compared. Differences were analyzed using unpaired t test and Chi square with significance assigned P < 0.05. Seventy-four patients underwent total thyroidectomy (EVS n = 59, UD n = 15). Operative time (EVS 115.0 ± 38.3 min, UD 88.0 ± 14.0 min, P = 0.012) was significantly decreased in the UD group compared with the EVS group. There were no significant differences in mean age (EVS 50.4 ± 13.9 years, UD 49.1 ± 15.6 years), gender distribution (EVS 78% female, UD 87% female), estimated blood loss (EVS 49.4 ± 44.7 mL, UD 47.0 ± 70.4 mL), and gland weight (EVS 67.4 ± 66.4 gm, UD 41.3 ± 26.6 gm). Analysis of complications, including hematoma, hypocalcemia, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy showed no significant difference. Based on the current analysis, ultrasonic dissection is a safe method of hemostasis for thyroid surgery. Its use decreases operative time when compared with electronic vessel sealing.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70450257865&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70450257865&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 19927508

AN - SCOPUS:70450257865

VL - 75

SP - 1073

EP - 1076

JO - American Surgeon

JF - American Surgeon

SN - 0003-1348

IS - 11

ER -