@Article{, title={Sutureless Focus Harmonic Thyroidectomy versus Conventional Clamping and Knot‑Tying Technique}, author={Ibrahim Falih Noori, Mansour Amin Mohammad}, journal={Medical Journal of Babylon مجلة بابل الطبية}, volume={15}, number={4}, pages={300-305}, year={2018}, abstract={Background: Thyroidectomy is the most frequent procedure in endocrine surgery. Since thyroid is the highly vascular organ, therefore, promptand meticulous hemostasis is extremely important. Although conventional thyroidectomy is used frequently with acceptable outcomes, it istime‑consuming and resulted in significant intraoperative blood loss with possible risk of injury to parathyroid glands and laryngeal nerves. Theadvent of ultrasonically activated focus harmonic device in thyroid surgery was encouraging for improving safety, effectiveness, and reductionof operative time. Aim of this Study: The purpose of this study was to analyze the effectiveness and surgical outcomes of using ultrasonicharmonic scalpel for thyroid surgery compared to conventional techniques (clamping and suture ligation (knots tying) and electrocautery.Patients and Methods: This is a prospective, randomized study in which 64 patients with various types of goiters presented for thyroidectomy.The patients were divided into two comparable groups. Group A (32 patients) included patients who had focus harmonic thyroidectomy andGroup B (32 patients) included patients who received conventional thyroidectomy. Results: Focus harmonic thyroidectomy showed significantreduction in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, volume of postoperative fluid drainage, and postoperative pain scores compared withconventional thyroidectomy. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative hypocalcemia and laryngeal nerve injurybetween both the groups. The total cost of focus harmonic thyroidectomy and hospital stay were also less compared with conventional techniques.Conclusions: Focus harmonic thyroidectomy was a safe, effective, faster, and beneficial alternative to conventional technique since it reducesthe time of surgery, blood loss, postoperative drainage, and pain with comparable postoperative complications

} }