Skip to main content
Log in

Advantages of new technologies in oral mucosal surgery: an intraoperative comparison among Nd:YAG laser, quantic molecular resonance scalpel, and cold blade

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Lasers in Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 20 August 2015

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the possible intraoperative advantages of Nd:YAG laser and quantic molecular resonance (QMR) scalpel in oral soft tissue surgery. One hundred sixty-three interventions were evaluated. Group 1 (G1) included 77 interventions performed with Nd:YAG laser, group 2 (G2) 45 with QMR scalpel, and group 3 (G3) 41 with cold blade. Parameters analyzed were as follows: speed of incision, time of intervention, intraoperative bleeding, number of stitches, patient compliance, and operator comfort. Data were analyzed using software STATA 12 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA). Mean speed of incision was 0.54 mm/s in G1, 2.83 mm/s in G2, and 1.58 mm/s in G3, Nd:YAG laser being the slowest. However, no significant differences among times of intervention were found. In particular, interventions in G1 (221.15 ± 220.89 s) have a mean duration lower than G2 (280.56 ± 248.31 s) and G3 (316.10 ± 248.69 s). Intraoperative bleeding occurred in 29.9 % (n = 23/77) of interventions in G1, 97.8 % (n = 44/45) in G2, and 97.6 % (n = 40/41) in G3 (p < 0.0001). Mean number of stitches in G1 was statistically lower (G1, 0.10; G2, 2.07; G3, 2.29; p < 0.0001). No differences with regard to patient compliance were detected. Operator comfort was higher in G1 (p < 0.0003). Nd:YAG laser and QMR scalpel give several advantages in oral mucosal surgery: Nd:YAG laser cuts tissue slowly, but it provides a good visibility and excellent hemostasis. QMR scalpel allows a very rapid cutting with no considerable temperature increase, but there is major risk of bleeding and need for sutures with lower operator comfort.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vescovi P, Manfredi M, Merigo E et al (2008) Quantic molecular resonance scalpel technique and its potential uses in oral surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 46:355–357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vescovi P, Meleti M, Corcione L et al (2012) Experimental assessment of mucosal incisions made with the quantum molecular resonance scalpel: biophysical and histologic findings. Ital Oral Surg 11(2):59–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vescovi P, Merigo E, Fornaini C, Rocca JP, Nammour S (2012) Thermal increase in the oral mucosa and in the jawbone during Nd:YAG laser applications. Ex vivo study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 17(4):e697–e704

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lopez-Jornet P, Camacho-Alonso F (2013) Comparison of pain and swelling after removal of oral leukoplakia with CO2 laser and cold knife: a randomized clinical trial. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 18(1):e38–e44

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vivek V, Jayasree RS, Balan A, Sreelatha KT, Gupta AK (2008) Three-year follow-up of oral leukoplakia after neodymium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser surgery. Lasers Med Sci 23(4):375–379

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Broccoletti R, Arduino PG, Vescovi P et al (2014) Quantic molecular resonance scalpel vs traditional scalpel in the treatment of labial mucocele: a two-center randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int 45(4):331–338

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yagüe-García J, España-Tost AJ, Berini-Aytés L, Gay-Escoda C (2009) Treatment of oral mucocele scalpel versus CO2 laser. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 14(9):e469–e474

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Júnior RM, Gueiros LA, Silva IH, de Albuquerque Carvalho A, Leão JC (2013) Labial frenectomy with Nd:YAG laser and conventional surgery: a comparative study. Lasers Med Sci

  9. Ize-Iyamu IN, Saheeb BD, Edetanlen BE (2013) Comparing the 810nm diode laser with conventional surgery in orthodontic soft tissue procedures. Ghana Med J 47(3):107–111

    PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Boj JR, Poirier C, Hernandez M, Espassa E, Espanya A (2011) Review: laser soft tissue treatments for paediatric dental patients. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 12(2):100–105

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vescovi P, Corcione L, Meleti M, Merigo E, Fornaini C, Manfredi M, Bonanini M, Govoni P, Rocca JP, Nammour S (2010) Nd:YAG laser versus traditional scalpel. A preliminary histological analysis of specimens from the human oral mucosa. Lasers Med Sci 25(5):685–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meleti Marco.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ilaria, G., Marco, M., Elisabetta, M. et al. Advantages of new technologies in oral mucosal surgery: an intraoperative comparison among Nd:YAG laser, quantic molecular resonance scalpel, and cold blade. Lasers Med Sci 30, 1903–1910 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-015-1769-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-015-1769-7

Keywords

Navigation