Skip to main content

Table 1 Baseline Data of the harmonic group and electrocautery group

From: Comparison of the effect of ultrasounic-harmonic scalpel and electrocautery in the treatment of axillary lymph nodes during radical surgery for breast cancer

Characteristics

Harmonic

Electrocautery

P value

n

64

64

 

Age, mean ± sd

58.28 ± 11.67

56.66 ± 11.50

0.429

AJCC tumor staging, n (%)

  

0.279

IA

32 (50.0%)

25 (39.1%)

 

IB

0 (0%)

3 (4.7%)

 

IIA

10 (15.6%)

17 (26.6%)

 

IIB

12 (18.8%)

8 (12.5%)

 

IIIA

4 (6.3%)

5 (7.8%)

 

IIIC

6 (9.4%)

6 (9.4%)

 

Clinical TNM stage, n (%)

  

0.777

I

32 (50.0%)

28 (43.8%)

 

II

22 (34.4%)

25 (39.1%)

 

III

10 (15.6%)

11 (17.2%)

 

BMI, mean ± sd

25.63 ± 3.61

24.36 ± 3.68

0.051

Surgery options, n (%)

  

0.149

Modified radical mastectomy

52 (81.3%)

45 (70.3%)

 

Breast sparing mastectomy

12 (18.8%)

19 (29.7%)

 

Comorbidities, n (%)

  

0.674

DM

5 (7.8%)

5 (7.8%)

 

HTN

12 (18.8%)

7 (10.9%)

 

CLD

2 (3.1%)

2 (3.1%)

 

Histology, n (%)

  

0.712

Ductal carcinoma

61 (95.3%)

60 (93.8%)

 

Lobular carcinoma

2 (3.1%)

1 (1.6%)

 

Other

1 (1.6%)

3 (4.7%)

 

Family history, n (%)

1 (1.6%)

6 (9.4%)

0.115

Parity

63 (98.4%)

64 (100%)

>0.05

Neoadjuvant therapy, n (%)

4 (6.3%)

8 (12.5%)

0.225

Smoking, n (%)

1 (1.6%)

5 (7.8%)

0.208

Drinking, n (%)

3 (4.7%)

1 (1.6%)

0.619

Extent of lymph node surgery

  

0.187

SNB

38 (59.4%)

34 (53.1%)

 

I,II

15 (23.4%)

21 (32.8%)

 

I,II,III

11 (17.2%)

9 (14.1%)

Â