Comparison of CO₂ laser and 4·0 MHz radiosurgery for making incisions in the skin and muscles of green iguanas (Iguana iguana)

Abstract

Four green iguanas scheduled for euthanasia were used to compare the extent of collateral tissue damage associated with CO(2) laser and 4.0 MHz radiosurgery. The iguanas were anaesthetised and a series of three skin and three muscle incisions was made by 4.0 MHz radiosurgery (0.18 mm wire electrode, 25 W, cut mode) and CO(2) laser (0.3 mm ceramic tip, 15 W focused beam super-pulse mode), and three incisions were made with a scalpel blade as controls. Following euthanasia, a total of 60 skin and 36 muscle sections were evaluated histologically. Radiosurgery and the laser both produced bloodless incisions, but radiosurgery caused significantly less collateral tissue damage in the skin (307 [97] v 386 [108] microm) and the muscle (18 [7] v 91 [15] microm).

Comparison of first-intention healing of carbon dioxide laser, 4.0-MHz radiosurgery, and scalpel incisions in ball pythons (Python regius)

“…Incisions were easily and quickly made with the RWRS at a digital power setting of 25 (55 W) without tissue drag, sparking, or charring. The power setting chosen in this study was higher than that used in previous studies for skin incisions in iguanas 17 and pigeons 18 but similar to the current used in another study 31 Table 2-Presence of granulomas, surface bacteria, bacteria within granulomas, and total wound bacteria (surface bacteria or bacteria within granulomas) for CO 2 laser, RWRS, and scalpel incision sites (n = 24/modality) in the skin of 6 ball pythons.…”

“…This is in contrast to a study 18 evaluating skin incisions in green iguanas (Iguana iguana), in which RWRS was found to cause significantly less necrosis and collateral tissue damage than CO 2 laser immediately following incision. Unfortunately, that study 18 did not investigate wound healing for both incisional modalities.…”

“…11 However, the thermal energy produced by each device also dissipates into the surrounding tissues or environment in the form of heat, which may delay healing and increase the risk of dehiscence. 12 In the few studies [13][14][15][16][17][18] comparing the use of CO 2 laser, radiosurgery, and scalpel for various procedures in domestic and nondomestic animals, none of these modalities have been consistently shown to be superior; although all are commonly used and advocated, there are no reports of studies comparing first-intention wound healing of CO 2 laser, RWRS, and scalpel incisions in reptiles.…”

Comparison of lateral thermal injury and healing of porcine skin incisions performed by CO2‐laser, monopolar electrosurgery and radiosurgery: a preliminary study based on histological and immunohistochemical results

“…However, few studies have been conducted to compare the relatively recently introduced in clinical practice MRS (i.e. MES operating at frequencies > 2.5–3 MHz) with other surgical and/or ablative modalities, based mostly on animal models 4,5,24–27 and rarely on clinical design 28–30 …”

“…2,[20][21][22][23] However, few studies have been conducted to compare the relatively recently introduced in clinical practice MRS (i.e. MES operating at frequencies > 2.5-3 MHz) with other surgical and/or ablative modalities, based mostly on animal models 4,5,[24][25][26][27] and rarely on clinical design. [28][29][30] This preliminary study is the first to our knowledge attempting a histological and immunohistochemical comparison of LTI produced during incision of porcine skin by CO2-laser, MES, and MRS and its effects on wound healing.…”