A Comparative Study of Colorado Micro Dissection Needle Versus Scalpel in Maxillofacial Surgery Volume 6 - Issue 1

Milan Modi¹, Sham ME², Suresh Menon³, Veerendra Kumar⁴, Archana S⁴ and Dhanush CV⁵*

• ¹Department of Faciomaxillary Surgery, India
• ²Professor, Department of Faciomaxillary & Microvascular Reconstruction Services, Vydehi Institute of Medical & Dental Sciences, India
• ³Head & Professor, Department of Faciomaxillary Surgery, Vydehi Institute of Medical & Dental Sciences, India
• ⁴Associate Professor, Department of Faciomaxillary Surgery, Vydehi Institute of Medical & Dental Sciences, India
• ⁵Senior Surgical Resident, Department of Faciomaxillary Surgery, Vydehi Institute of Medical & Dental Sciences, India

Received: February 18, 2021;   Published: March 02, 2021

Corresponding author:Dhanush CV, Senior Surgical Resident, Department of Faciomaxillary Surgery, Vydehi Institute of Medical & Dental Sciences, India

DOI: 10.32474/SJO.2021.06.000229

Fulltexts PDF

To view the Full Article   Peer-reviewed Article PDF

Abstract

Purpose: Current advances in equipment technology have offered us with tremendous advantage in performing various surgeries. Among these is the Colorado electro micro-dissection needle. Although use of electro surgery dates back to 1909 when it was first used to fulgratetumors, to 1926 when “Cushing” first introduced it in neurosurgery. Its use to open skin has been rejected or reserved in past for fear of delayed wound healing or infection. Currently there is enough literature and evidence to support favorable use of electro-cautery as a complete or partial substitution to cold steel, in terms of operative blood loss, post-operative pain and surgical scar.

Materials and Method: This study clinically evaluated the safety and efficacy of Colorado micro dissection needle over cold steel in skin incisions in 60 patients undergoing various maxillofacial procedures. The study was done to compare the efficacy of Colorado micro-dissection needle and cold steel (Scalpel) in oral and maxillofacial surgeries; for post-operative scar (3rd/6th months), incisional blood loss, post-operative pain and total time taken to complete the length of incision.

Result: The study sample contained 60 patients with ages ranging from 18-60years. Thirty patients were included for Colorado micro dissection needle group (group I) and 30 for cold steel (Scalpel) group (group II).The average time taken for incision with the Colorado micro dissection needle was 18.40seconds, as compared to the cold Steel which was 39.63 seconds. The time taken for incision with Colorado micro dissection needle was less than Cold Steel. Post-operative pain was less when using Colorado micro dissection needle. In the Colorado micro dissection needle group, mean width of the scar was 1.68 mm per incision at 3rd month interval and 1.20 mm at 6th month interval per incision. In the Cold Steel group, mean width of the scar was 2.48 mm per incision at 3rd month interval and 2.23 mm per incision at 6th month interval. It was noted that, a Colorado micro dissection needle gives less width and better scar than Cold steel.

Conclusion: The findings of this study recommend the use of the Colorado micro dissection needle in all maxillofacial procedures.

Keywords: Colorado micro dissection needle; cold steel (scalpel); skin incision; oral and maxillofacial surgery

Abstract| Introduction| Materials and Method| Results| Discussion| Conclusion| References|