Objectives: Some controversies have recently arisen regarding the frequency of post-operative haemorrhagic complications in relation to the surgical procedures adopted for tonsillectomy. The authors set out to verify the relationship between different surgical techniques and post-operative haemorrhage based on the analysis of data derived from multi-centric studies appeared during the last fifteen years. Materials and Methods: Multi-centric English and Italian studies pertaining to the frequency of post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage secondary to different surgical techniques published between 2000 and 2015 were selected. The data relevant to post-surgical haemorrhagic complications were elaborated by ANOVA test. Results: Eight multi-centric studies were analysed. The mean frequency of post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage was: 1.13% for primary haemorrhage, 5.37% for secondary haemorrhage, and 6.5% as overall for cold dissection with cold haemostasis; 0.99% for primary haemorrhage, 2.91% for secondary haemorrhage, and 3.9% as overall for cold dissection with hot haemostasis; 1.31% for primary haemorrhage, 7.38% for secondary haemorrhage, and 8.69% as overall for hot dissection with hot haemostasis. The statistical comparison did not show significant differences between the frequencies of post-tonsillectomy primary, secondary, and total haemorrhage in relation to the surgical techniques employed. Conclusion: A great variability in the frequency of haemorrhagic complications reported in the selected articles was found, regardless of the surgical technique employed. These findings, together with the lack of a statistically significant difference in post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage between the techniques employed, must be carefully considered by professionals involved in health organizations in clinical wards and the relative problems linked to medical liability.

Can a surgical tecnique be a risk for post-tonsillectomy hemorrage? Our point of view

Domenico Testa
;
Eva Aurora Massimilla;Gaetano Motta
2018

Abstract

Objectives: Some controversies have recently arisen regarding the frequency of post-operative haemorrhagic complications in relation to the surgical procedures adopted for tonsillectomy. The authors set out to verify the relationship between different surgical techniques and post-operative haemorrhage based on the analysis of data derived from multi-centric studies appeared during the last fifteen years. Materials and Methods: Multi-centric English and Italian studies pertaining to the frequency of post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage secondary to different surgical techniques published between 2000 and 2015 were selected. The data relevant to post-surgical haemorrhagic complications were elaborated by ANOVA test. Results: Eight multi-centric studies were analysed. The mean frequency of post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage was: 1.13% for primary haemorrhage, 5.37% for secondary haemorrhage, and 6.5% as overall for cold dissection with cold haemostasis; 0.99% for primary haemorrhage, 2.91% for secondary haemorrhage, and 3.9% as overall for cold dissection with hot haemostasis; 1.31% for primary haemorrhage, 7.38% for secondary haemorrhage, and 8.69% as overall for hot dissection with hot haemostasis. The statistical comparison did not show significant differences between the frequencies of post-tonsillectomy primary, secondary, and total haemorrhage in relation to the surgical techniques employed. Conclusion: A great variability in the frequency of haemorrhagic complications reported in the selected articles was found, regardless of the surgical technique employed. These findings, together with the lack of a statistically significant difference in post-tonsillectomy haemorrhage between the techniques employed, must be carefully considered by professionals involved in health organizations in clinical wards and the relative problems linked to medical liability.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11591/387821
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact