Copyright
©2011 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Oct 27, 2011; 3(10): 147-152
Published online Oct 27, 2011. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v3.i10.147
Published online Oct 27, 2011. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v3.i10.147
Table 4 Complications of patients undergoing bipolar diathermy (group 1) or ultrasonic scalpel (group 2)
| Group 1 (n = 30) | Group 2 (n = 30) | P | |
| Urinary retention | 2 | 5 | 0.424 |
| Wound edema (at 1 wk) | 5 | 6 | 0.330 |
| Hemorrhage | 0 | 1 | 1.000 |
| Anal stenosis (at 6 wk) | 0 | 0 | - |
| Flatus incontinence (at 6 wk) | 0 | 0 | - |
| Impaired wound healing (at 6 wk) | 2 | 1 | 1.000 |
| Recurrence (at 6 wk) | 0 | 0 | - |
- Citation: Tsunoda A, Sada H, Sugimoto T, Kano N, Kawana M, Sasaki T, Hashimoto H. Randomized controlled trial of bipolar diathermy vs ultrasonic scalpel for closed hemorrhoidectomy. World J Gastrointest Surg 2011; 3(10): 147-152
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9366/full/v3/i10/147.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v3.i10.147