Surgical site infection: An observer-blind, randomized trial comparing electrocautery and conventional scalpel

International Journal of Surgery

Volumn 12, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 681-687

  Rongetti, Regiane Ladislau ^a   Oliveira e Castro, Paulo de Tarso ^a   Vieira, Renê Aloisio da Costa ^a   Serrano, Sérgio Vicente ^a   Mengatto, Mariana Fabro ^a   Fregnani, José Humberto Tavares Guerreiro ^a  

^a BARRETOS CANCER HOSPITAL   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Body mass index; Clinical trial; Electrocoagulation; Gynecological surgical procedure; Surgical wound infection

Indexed keywords

CEFAZOLIN;

ABDOMINAL SURGERY; ADULT; ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CAUTERIZATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTIVE SURGERY; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY; HUMAN; INCISION; INFECTION RISK; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OPERATION DURATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCALPEL; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; SURGICAL INFECTION; EPIDERMOLYSIS; ESCHERICHIA COLI; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MORGANELLA MORGANII; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; STAPHYLOCOCCUS EPIDERMIDIS; WOUND DEHISCENCE; WOUND FLUID; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ELECTROCOAGULATION; MIDDLE AGED; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION;

ELECTIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; ELECTROCOAGULATION; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION;

EID: 84902956265     PISSN: 17439191     EISSN: 17439159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.05.064     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Rutkow I.M. History of surgery. Sabiston Textbook of Surgery. The Biological Basis of Modern Surgical Practice 2005, 3-19. Elsevier, Philadelphia. seventeenth ed. C.M. Towsend, R.D. Beauchamp, B.M. Evers, K.L. Mattox (Eds.).
2. Ly J., Mittal A., Windsor J. Systematic review and meta-analysis of cutting diathermy versus scalpel for skin incision. Br. J. Surg. 2012, 99:613-620.
3. Pollack S.V., Carruthers A., Grekin R.C. The history of electrosurgery. Dermatol Surg. 2000, 26:904-908.
4. Oliveira A.C., Martins M.A., Martinho G.H., Clemente W.T., Lacerda R.A. Comparative study of surgical wound infection diagnosed in-hospital and post discharge. Rev. Saude Publica 2002, 36:717-722.
5. Bratzler D.W., Hunt D.R. The surgical infection prevention and surgical care improvement projects: national initiatives to improve outcomes for patients having surgery. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2006, 43:322-330.
6. Mangram A.J., Horan T.C., Pearson M.L., Silver L.C., Jarvis W.R. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 1999, 20:250-278. quiz 79-80.
7. Johnson C.D., Serpell J.W. Wound infection after abdominal incision with scalpel or diathermy. Br. J. Surg. 1990, 77:626-627.
8. Hemsell D.L., Hemsell P.G., Nobles B., Johnson E.R., Little B.B., Heard M. Abdominal wound problems after hysterectomy with electrocautery vs. scalpel subcutaneous incision. Infect. Dis. Obstet. Gynecol. 1993, 1:27-31.
9. Telfer J.R., Canning G., Galloway D.J. Comparative study of abdominal incision techniques. Br. J. Surg. 1993, 80:233-235.
10. Groot G., Chappell E.W. Electrocautery used to create incisions does not increase wound infection rates. Am. J. Surg. 1994, 167:601-603.
11. Franchi M., Ghezzi F., Benedetti-Panici P.L., Melpignano M., Fallo L., Tateo S., et al. A multicentre collaborative study on the use of cold scalpel and electrocautery for midline abdominal incision. Am. J. Surg. 2001, 181:128-132.
12. Kearns S.R., Connolly E.M., McNally S., McNamara D.A., Deasy J. Randomized clinical trial of diathermy versus scalpel incision in elective midline laparotomy. Br. J. Surg. 2001, 88:41-44.
13. Shamim M. Diathermy vs. scalpel skin incisions in general surgery: double-blind, randomized, clinical trial. World J. Surg. 2009, 33:1594-1599.
14. Eren T., Balik E., Ziyade S., Yamaner S., Akyuz A., Bugra D. Do different abdominal incision techniques play a role in wound complications in patients operated on for gastrointestinal malignancies ? "Scalpel vs. electrocautery". Acta Chir. Belg 2010, 110:451-456.
15. Ahmad N.Z., Ahmed A. Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of surgical scalpel or diathermy in making abdominal skin incisions. Ann. Surg. 2011, 253:8-13.
16. Knaust A., Moussa A., Stilianakis N.I., Eikmann T., Herr C. Three questions to screen for postdischarge surgical site infections. Am. J. Infect. Control 2009, 37:420-422.
17. Martins M.A., Franca E., Matos J.C., Goulart E.M. Post-discharge surveillance of children and adolescents treated for surgical site infections at a university hospital in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Cad. Saude Publica 2008, 24:1033-1041.
18. Charoenkwan K., Chotirosniramit N., Rerkasem K. Scalpel versus electrosurgery for abdominal incisions. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2012, 6:CD005987.
19. Merkow R.P., Bilimoria K.Y., McCarter M.D., Bentrem D.J. Effect of body mass index on short-term outcomes after colectomy for cancer. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2009, 208:53-61.
20. Thornburg L.L., Linder M.A., Durie D.E., Walker B., Pressman E.K., Glantz J.C. Risk factors for wound complications in morbidly obese women undergoing primary cesarean delivery. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012, 25:1544-1548.
21. Grantcharov T.P., Rosenberg J. Vertical compared with transverse incisions in abdominal surgery. Eur. J. Surg. 2001, 167:260-267.