Abstract
BACKGROUND: We thought that using electrocautery for hemostasis caused recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. We reflected the prolonged use of electrocautery and employed NU-KNIT® to achieve hemostasis nearby the recurrent laryngeal nerve. We assessed that using NU-KNIT® hemostasis prevented or not postoperative recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, retrospectively. The present study was evaluated to compare using electrocautery hemostasis with using NU-KNIT® hemostasis during lymphadenectomy along recurrent laryngeal nerve. The variables compared were morbidity rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, operation time, and blood loss. RESULTS: We use NU-KNIT® to achieve hemostasis without strong compression. This group is named group N. On the other hand, we use electrocautery to achieve hemostasis. This group is named group E. Complication rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was higher in group E (55.6%) than group N (5.3%) (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Even hemostasis using NU-KNIT® was slightly more time-consuming than using electrocautery, we concluded that it would be useful to prevent recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy.