The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Guillotine versus dissection tonsillectomy: randomised, controlled trial

Guillotine versus dissection tonsillectomy: randomised, controlled trial
Guillotine versus dissection tonsillectomy: randomised, controlled trial
This trial aimed to compare the guillotine technique of tonsillectomy with ‘cold steel’ dissection, the current ‘gold standard’.

A single centre, randomised, controlled trial.

One hundred children aged 3 to 11 years who were listed for bilateral tonsillectomy were recruited. Patients had one tonsil removed by each technique, and were blinded to the side. The operative time, intra-operative blood loss, haemostasis requirement and post-operative pain scores were recorded and compared.

Operative time and intra-operative blood loss were both significantly less for the guillotine technique (p < 0.001) and there was a significantly reduced haemostasis requirement (p < 0.001). Pain was also less on the guillotine side (p < 0.001). There were no tonsillar remnants or palatal trauma for either technique. There was no significant difference between techniques in the frequency of secondary haemorrhage.

This study provides level Ib evidence that guillotine tonsillectomy in children with mobile tonsils is an effective and time-efficient procedure which produces less intra-operative blood loss and post-operative pain than cold steel dissection.
tonsillectomy, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, efficiency
0022-2151
1142-1149
Frampton, S.J.
0910b14b-dee4-4843-afb1-7f3f8e8b01fe
Ward, M.
a199bc96-75b6-415c-bffe-e68e8a00b468
Sunkaraneni, V.S.
ad07934e-5265-45d7-ac9f-b3a5a0b08e10
Ismail-Koch, H.
c9075c56-cd32-4075-8ab6-fbe96859b688
Sheppard, Z.A.
3d59f378-1608-414e-bd65-07dc25a1b01e
Salib, R.J.
d6fde1c1-5b5e-43f7-ae1c-42cce6a0c9fc
Jain, P.K.
9efc0e1d-8a2f-44fc-9638-12f2d2cf3a75
Frampton, S.J.
0910b14b-dee4-4843-afb1-7f3f8e8b01fe
Ward, M.
a199bc96-75b6-415c-bffe-e68e8a00b468
Sunkaraneni, V.S.
ad07934e-5265-45d7-ac9f-b3a5a0b08e10
Ismail-Koch, H.
c9075c56-cd32-4075-8ab6-fbe96859b688
Sheppard, Z.A.
3d59f378-1608-414e-bd65-07dc25a1b01e
Salib, R.J.
d6fde1c1-5b5e-43f7-ae1c-42cce6a0c9fc
Jain, P.K.
9efc0e1d-8a2f-44fc-9638-12f2d2cf3a75

Frampton, S.J., Ward, M., Sunkaraneni, V.S., Ismail-Koch, H., Sheppard, Z.A., Salib, R.J. and Jain, P.K. (2012) Guillotine versus dissection tonsillectomy: randomised, controlled trial. The Journal of Laryngology & Otology, 126 (11), 1142-1149. (doi:10.1017/S002221511200196X). (PMID:22963759)

Record type: Article

Abstract

This trial aimed to compare the guillotine technique of tonsillectomy with ‘cold steel’ dissection, the current ‘gold standard’.

A single centre, randomised, controlled trial.

One hundred children aged 3 to 11 years who were listed for bilateral tonsillectomy were recruited. Patients had one tonsil removed by each technique, and were blinded to the side. The operative time, intra-operative blood loss, haemostasis requirement and post-operative pain scores were recorded and compared.

Operative time and intra-operative blood loss were both significantly less for the guillotine technique (p < 0.001) and there was a significantly reduced haemostasis requirement (p < 0.001). Pain was also less on the guillotine side (p < 0.001). There were no tonsillar remnants or palatal trauma for either technique. There was no significant difference between techniques in the frequency of secondary haemorrhage.

This study provides level Ib evidence that guillotine tonsillectomy in children with mobile tonsils is an effective and time-efficient procedure which produces less intra-operative blood loss and post-operative pain than cold steel dissection.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

e-pub ahead of print date: 11 September 2012
Published date: November 2012
Keywords: tonsillectomy, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, efficiency
Organisations: Clinical & Experimental Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 349216
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/349216
ISSN: 0022-2151
PURE UUID: a1c5c82e-8a67-4a6d-8c4b-9864cafff16d
ORCID for R.J. Salib: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6753-7844

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 26 Feb 2013 15:20
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:14

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: S.J. Frampton
Author: M. Ward
Author: V.S. Sunkaraneni
Author: H. Ismail-Koch
Author: Z.A. Sheppard
Author: R.J. Salib ORCID iD
Author: P.K. Jain

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×