Comparison of Radiofrequency and Electrocautery With Conventional Scalpel Incisions

The disadvantages of conventional scalpels, including insufficient control of bleeding, prompted us to search for new alternative methods such as electrosurgery and radiosurgery. In this study, the conventional scalpel was compared with radiosurgery and electrosurgery for wound healing with assessment of lateral heat production, inflammation, and instrument performance.Incisions were made in the palatal mucosa of 42 Wistar rats using a scalpel, electrocautery instrument, or radiofrequency instrument. Postoperative hemostasis, tissue coagulation, and tissue sticking were measured, and pain evaluation through weight loss was recorded. Gingival biopsy specimens from the surgical area were obtained at the time of surgery and 2, 4, 7, and 14 days postoperatively and were evaluated immunohistochemically for inducible nitric oxide synthase and heat shock protein 70. Kruskal-Wallis, 1-way analysis of variance, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical evaluation.The rats in the electrosurgery and radiosurgery groups had aggressively greater weight loss when compared with the scalpel group in the first 7 days. Hemostasis was better in the electrocautery group, tissue coagulation was greater in the radiofrequency group (P < .001), and tissue sticking was lesser in the scalpel group (P < .001) compared with the other groups. Inducible nitric oxide synthase expression and heat shock protein 70 expression were similar in all 3 groups.Electrosurgery performed better regarding hemostasis, whereas a scalpel was superior in terms of tissue sticking and tissue coagulation. Radiosurgery was superior regarding hemostasis when compared with a conventional scalpel, but it was not as successful as electrosurgery.