Premium
Conventional instrument vs. laser‐assisted arthroscopic meniscectomy
Author(s) -
Yakin David E.,
Rogers Vincent P.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
lasers in surgery and medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.888
H-Index - 112
eISSN - 1096-9101
pISSN - 0196-8092
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1096-9101(1999)25:5<435::aid-lsm10>3.0.co;2-z
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , arthroscopy , range of motion , holmium , effusion , endoscopy , laser , physics , optics
Background and Objectives Lasers have been advocated for use in arthroscopy; however, results do not show significantly different outcomes from conventional instrument arthroscopy. This study assesses outcomes and cost to patients treated with conventional arthroscopic instrumentation vs. holmium laser. Study Design/Materials and Methods Sixty‐seven men and 26 women, average age 41 years (range, 15–76 years), were divided into two groups: patients who underwent conventional arthroscopic partial meniscectomies (43 patients) vs. those who underwent the procedure with holmium:yttrium‐aluminum‐garnet laser (50 patients). Hospital and clinic records were reviewed for demographic data, medical and operative histories, operative data, and follow‐up examinations. Tourniquet time, range of motion, effusion, pain, and total cost were compared. Results No significant differences existed in range of motion and effusions between the two groups. The mean cost of conventional arthroscopic partial meniscectomy was significantly lower, at $1,102 (range, $538–1,586) vs. laser arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, at $1,536 (range, $851–2,894) ( p < 0.001). Each patient of the laser group was billed an additional $420 to offset the rental of laser equipment (value, $150,000). All other costs in the laser and conventional groups were similar. Conclusion We recommend conventional arthroscopic instrumentation for routine partial meniscectomy. Lasers Surg. Med. 25:435–437, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.