PURPOSE: We evaluated the safety and cost-effectiveness of the harmonic scalpel (HS) during conventional "open" thyroidectomy (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients scheduled forconventional total thyroidectomy (TT) were included in the study and randomly assigned to TT with the use of HS (HS group) or with knot tying technique (KT group). RESULTS:Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the HS group (P < 0.001), as well as the total operative room occupation time (P < 0.001). The cost of the disposable materials is significantly higher in the HS group (420.1 +/- 23.2 vs 137.8 +/- 25.3 euros; P < 0.001). Conversely, drugs, personnel and operative room charges were significantly higher in KT group patients (P < 0.001). Overall, no significant difference was found between the two groups concerning the charges of the hospitalisation (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS:HS is a safe alternative to KT, allowing for a significant reduction of operative time without increasing complications rate and overall costs and probably better utilization of health resources.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We evaluated the safety and cost-effectiveness of the harmonic scalpel (HS) during conventional "open" thyroidectomy (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients scheduled for conventional total thyroidectomy (TT) were included in the study and randomly assigned to TT with the use of HS (HS group) or with knot tying technique (KT group). RESULTS: Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the HS group (P < 0.001), as well as the total operative room occupation time (P < 0.001). The cost of the disposable materials is significantly higher in the HS group (420.1 +/- 23.2 vs 137.8 +/- 25.3 euros; P < 0.001). Conversely, drugs, personnel and operative room charges were significantly higher in KT group patients (P < 0.001). Overall, no significant difference was found between the two groups concerning the charges of the hospitalisation (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS:HS is a safe alternative to KT, allowing for a significant reduction of operative time without increasing complications rate and overall costs and probably better utilization of health resources.
Authors: Vassilios A Lachanas; Emmanuel P Prokopakis; Antonios A Mpenakis; Alexander D Karatzanis; George A Velegrakis Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Ioannis E Petrakis; Nektarios E Kogerakis; Kostas G Lasithiotakis; Nikolaos Vrachassotakis; Georgios E Chalkiadakis Journal: Head Neck Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: A Bove; Ig Papanikolaou; G Bongarzoni; Pa Mattei; H Markogiannakis; M Chatzipetrou; V D'Addetta; Rm Di Renzo; M Fiordaliso; L Corbellini Journal: Hippokratia Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 0.471
Authors: Pietro Contin; Käthe Gooßen; Kathrin Grummich; Katrin Jensen; Hubertus Schmitz-Winnenthal; Markus W Büchler; Markus K Diener Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2013-11-16 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Jennifer M Siu; Justin C McCarty; Shekhar Gadkaree; Edward J Caterson; Gregory Randolph; Ian J Witterick; Antoine Eskander; Regan W Bergmark Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Sebastiano Filetti; Paul W Ladenson; Marco Biffoni; Maria Giuseppina D'Ambrosio; Laura Giacomelli; Stefania Lopatriello Journal: Endocrine Date: 2016-05-12 Impact factor: 3.633