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

被引:16
作者
Rongetti, Regiane Ladislau [1 ]
Oliveira E Castro, Paulo de Tarso [1 ]
da Costa Vieira, Rene Aloisio [2 ]
Serrano, Sergio Vicente [3 ]
Mengatto, Mariana Fabro [4 ]
Guerreiro Fregnani, Jose Humberto Tavares [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Barretos Canc Hosp, Infect Control Commiss, BR-14784600 Barretos, SP, Brazil
[2] Barretos Canc Hosp, Breast Surg Dept, BR-14784600 Barretos, SP, Brazil
[3] Barretos Canc Hosp, Dept Med Oncol, BR-14784600 Barretos, SP, Brazil
[4] Barretos Canc Hosp, Dept Gynecol Oncol, BR-14784600 Barretos, SP, Brazil
[5] Barretos Canc Hosp, Teaching & Res Inst, BR-14784600 Barretos, SP, Brazil
关键词
Surgical wound infection; Electrocoagulation; Gynecological surgical procedure; Body mass index; Clinical trial; ABDOMINAL INCISION; WOUND-INFECTION; DIATHERMY; COMPLICATIONS; METAANALYSIS; PREVENTION; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.05.064
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Aim: To evaluate the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) based on the type of scalpel used for incisions in the skin and in subcutaneous tissues. Methods: Observer-blind, randomized equivalence clinical trial with two arms (electrocautery versus conventional scalpel) which evaluated 133 women undergoing elective abdominal gynecologic oncology surgery. A simple randomization stratified by body mass index (BMI: 30 kg/m(2)) was carried out. Women were evaluated at 14 and 30 days following the operation. A multivariate analysis was performed in order to check whether the type of scalpel would be a risk factor for SSI. Results: Group arms were balanced for all variables, excepted for surgical time, which was significantly higher in the electrocautery group (mean: 161.1 versus 203.5 min, P=0.029). The rates of SSI were 7.4% and 9.7%, respectively, for the conventional scalpel and electrocautery groups (P=0.756). The exploratory multivariate model identified body mass index >= 30 kg/ m(2) (OR = 24.2, 95% CI: 2.8-212.1) and transverse surgical incision (OR = 8.1, 95% CI: 1.5-42.6) as independent risk factors for SSI. The type of scalpel used in surgery, when adjusted for these variables and the surgery time, was not a risk factor for SSI. Conclusion: This study showed that the SSI rates for conventional scalpel and electrocautery were not significantly different. These results were consistent with others reported in the literature and would not allow a surgeon to justify scalpel choice based on SSI. Trial number: NCT01410175 (Clinical Trials - NIH). (C) 2014 Surgical Associates Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:681 / 687
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Surgical Scalpel or Diathermy in Making Abdominal Skin Incisions [J].
Ahmad, Nasir Zaheer ;
Ahmed, Aftab .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2011, 253 (01) :8-13
[2]   The surgical infection prevention and surgical care improvement projects: National initiatives to improve outcomes for patients having surgery [J].
Bratzler, Dale W. ;
Hunt, David R. .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2006, 43 (03) :322-330
[3]  
Charoenkwan K, 2012, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, V6, DOI [10.1002/14651858.CD005987, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD005987]
[4]   Do Different Abdominal Incision Techniques Play a Role in Wound Complications in Patients Operated on for Gastrointestinal Malignancies ? "Scalpel vs. Electrocautery" [J].
Eren, T. ;
Balik, E. ;
Ziyade, S. ;
Yamaner, S. ;
Akyuz, A. ;
Bugra, D. .
ACTA CHIRURGICA BELGICA, 2010, 110 (04) :451-456
[5]   A multicentre collaborative study on the use of cold scalpel and electrocautery for midline abdominal incision [J].
Franchi, M ;
Ghezzi, F ;
Benedetti-Panici, PL ;
Melpignano, M ;
Fallo, L ;
Tateo, S ;
Maggi, R ;
Scambia, G ;
Mangili, G ;
Buttarelli, M .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2001, 181 (02) :128-132
[6]  
Grantcharov TP, 2001, EUR J SURG, V167, P260
[7]   ELECTROCAUTERY USED TO CREATE INCISIONS DOES NOT INCREASE WOUND-INFECTION RATES [J].
GROOT, G ;
CHAPPELL, EW .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1994, 167 (06) :601-603
[8]  
Hemsell D L, 1993, Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol, V1, P27, DOI 10.1155/S1064744993000079
[9]   WOUND-INFECTION AFTER ABDOMINAL INCISION WITH SCALPEL OR DIATHERMY [J].
JOHNSON, CD ;
SERPELL, JW .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1990, 77 (06) :626-627
[10]   Randomized clinical trial of diathermy versus scalpel incision in elective midline laparotomy [J].
Kearns, SR ;
Connolly, EM ;
McNally, S ;
McNamara, DA ;
Deasy, J .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2001, 88 (01) :41-44