Assessment of treatment outcomes after using electrocautery and scalpel blade in separate patients for minor oral surgical procedure

A randomised controlled clinical trail

https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS2.5443

Authors

  • Rohit Goyal Prof & H.O.D. Dept of OMFS, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College And Reseach Centre, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India
  • Javed Akhter PG resident 3rd year, Dept of OMFS, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College And Reseach Centre, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India
  • Ganesh Thapa Consultatnt – OMFS
  • Pranam Nirangjan PG resident 3rd year, Dept of OMFS, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College And Reseach Centre, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India
  • Akshay PG resident 2nd year, Dept of OMFS, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College And Reseach Centre, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India
  • Priyadarshani Khadase PG resident 3rd year, Dept of OMFS, Maharaja Ganga Singh Dental College And Reseach Centre, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India

Keywords:

electrocautery, wound healing, incisions

Abstract

Context: Conventionally minor oral surgical treatments are  done with the use of Bard Parker handle for incising the tissues. The favourability of B.P.  handle is its low cost and no extra equipments. Electro surgery has many applications in oral surgery , but it is not widely used. The presence of varying information on electro surgical wound healing might be the reason. Aims: This study aimed to assess and compare the treatment outcomes in minor oral surgery done by electrocautery and scalpel blade using clinical parameters: Bleeding intraoperatively, Time taken for incision intraoperatively, Pain postoperatively, Healing of the surgical site postoperatively. Methods and Material: Sixty patients between age group ranging 15 to 65 years who reported to Dept of Oral & Maxillofacial surgery, M.G.S. Dental college underwent electrosurgery or scalpel surgery for minor oral surgical procedures under local anaesthesia, were the study subjects. They were randomly and equally divided into two groups. Statistical analysis used: Mann Whitney U test.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Smith TL, Smith JM. Electrocautery in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery : Principles , Advances , and Complications Laryngoscope

Dr Naresh Sharma, Dr Sachin Dev Sachdeva. Electro-Surgery & scalpel surgery for incision for preprosthetic surgery and impacted lower third molar surgeries, A comparative clinical study.

Health drip, electrosurgery in dentistry. Dental health

Babaji et al. Electro surgery in dentistry: Report of cases, Journal of pediatric dentistry,

Vimal Kalia, Nayla Siddiqui, Geeta Kalra. Comparative Analysis of Radiosurgery and Scalpel Blade Surgery in Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Incisions: a Clinical Trail. Journal of maxillofac. Oral Surg. 21 December 2017

Kearns et al. Randomized clinical trail of diathermy versus scalpel incision in elective midline laprotomy.

Pearlman et al. A Prospective Study of Incisional Time, Blood Loss, Pain, and Healing With Carbon Dioxide Laser, Scalpel, and Electrosurgery

Rathofer et al. A comparison of healing and pain following excision of inflammatory papillary hyperplasia with electrosurgery and blade-loop knives in human patients

Priya N, Lamture YR, Luthra L. A comparative study of scalpel versus surgical diathermy skin incisions in clean and clean contaminated effective abdominal surgeries in AVBRH, Wardha, Maharashtra, India

Nagargoje et al. Evaluation of Electrocautery and Stainless Steel Scalpel in Oral Mucoperiosteal Incision for Mandibular Anterior Fracture: annals for maxillofacial surgery, Vol 9 (2019).

Schneider et al. Use of ultrasonic scalpel and monopolar electrocautery for skin incisions in neck dissection: a prospective randomized trial, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery(2018)

Published

03-04-2022

How to Cite

Goyal, R., Akhter, J., Thapa, G., Nirangjan, P., Akshay, A., & Khadase, P. (2022). Assessment of treatment outcomes after using electrocautery and scalpel blade in separate patients for minor oral surgical procedure: A randomised controlled clinical trail. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(S2), 2164–2171. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS2.5443

Issue

Section

Peer Review Articles