RETRACTED ARTICLE: Scalpel versus diathermy skin incision in Caesarean section

AbdElaal, Nasser K; Ellakwa, Hamid; Elhalaby, AllaaEldin F; Shaheen, Abdelhamid; Aish, Ahmed H

doi:10.1080/01443615.2018.1527298

Cited by 8 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The median volume of bleeding during incision in the diathermy-group was 11.5 ml (range 9 to 15 ml) which was statistically significantly lower as in comparison to the scalpel-group (median amount was 22 ml with range between 18 and 26 ml) (p <0.001). Our results came in the same line with AbdElaal et al (11) who showed that a diathermy incisions were accompanying with significant bleeding than scalpel incisions; the mean bleeding in the diathermy-group was 12.44 ± 1.83 mL, while in the scalpel-group was 22.34 ± 4.80 mL. Within the same line, Elbohoty et al (2) revealed a high significant alteration in bleeding (P < 0.001) among the studied groups, preferring the usage of diathermy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Comparison between Cutting Diathermy and Surgical Scalpel for Skin Incision during Cesarean Section

Shaaban¹,

Elshorbagy

Rashed

2022

SJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and aim: Caesarean section (C-section) is one of the commonest surgeries accomplished all over the world, and it has several surgical methods. This work aimed to study the safety and efficacy of cutting diathermy for skin incision during C-section in comparison to surgical scalpel. Methodology: This was a prospective randomized comparative study that was performed in the Obstetrics and Gynecology department, Al-Azhar university hospitals (New Damietta) in the interval between September 2019 to October 2020. Results: The visual analogue scale (VAS) score in the diathermy-group was statistically significantly lower as in comparison to the scalpel-group at 2, 6, 12 and 24 h post-operative. Also, there was an increase in the VAS score in the two groups at 2, 6, and 12 hours’ post-operative as in comparison to the first hour post-operative. This difference didn’t achieve a statistically significant difference except at 12 hours (0.005 and 0.001) in the diathermy-group and scalpel-group respectively. Conclusion: The utilization of diathermy for skin incision in C-section in this work was accompanying with decreased incisional bleeding, incisional period, surgical period and post-operative pains. It had no impact on wound closures (epithelialization) and wasn’t accompanied with any postponement in wounds healing. It was pronounced safely in this work if performed in the suitable way and method with slight or no side-effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Comparison between Cutting Diathermy and Surgical Scalpel for Skin Incision during Cesarean Section

Shaaban¹,

Elshorbagy

Rashed

2022

SJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the 2013 review, there have been six additional RCTs and one Cochrane Review on these techniques, with primary outcomes including operative time, postoperative analgesia requirements, febrile morbidity, blood loss, and duration of hospital stay. 4 , 20 – 27 Techniques that incorporated sharp dissection and blunt tissue expansion and entry were favored and supported by the Cochrane Review.…”

Section: Standardized Cesarean Delivery Surgical Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

The Case for Standardizing Cesarean Delivery Technique

Dahlke

Mendez‐Figueroa

Maggio

et al. 2020

Obstetrics &Amp; Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rodriguez and Reyes [25] limited the use of electrocautery to the skin incision followed up by standard protocols for the subsequent incisions and found no significant difference regarding wound infection postoperative pain at 24th hour or 72nd hour. AbdElaal et al [30] demonstrated significantly less incision time, operative time, incisional blood loss, and postoperative pain with electrocautery but no significant difference in wound healing or complications. In another more interesting study, Kaban et al [31] used electrocautery or cold scalpel for half of the skin incision on the same patient and compared the two halves in terms of wound healing and cosmetic appearance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of electrocautery and scalpel for blood loss and postoperative pain in Pfannenstiel incisions in recurrent cesarean sections: a randomized controlled trial

Ağar,

Karakoç

2021

Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Limited data is available on the use of cold-scalpel and electrocautery blades in Cesarean delivery (CD) operations. This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare their use for subcutaneous incisions in terms of blood loss and postoperative pain in women undergoing repeat CD. Methods: A total of 149 women scheduled for elective CD underwent spinal anesthesia, Pfannenstiel transverse skin incision with a cold-scalpel blade, and subsequent subcutaneous incisions until the peritoneum with a cold-scalpel or electrocautery blade. Perioperative blood loss and postoperative pain were evaluated. Results: The groups were similar in terms of maternal age, physical characteristics, and gestational age. The electrocautery group recorded significantly less blood loss and pain at the postoperative 6th and 12th hours. No significant correlation was found between blood loss or pain and women's physical characteristics or gestational age. Discussion: Perioperative and postoperative pain associated with CD is one of the predominant causes of anxiety in mothers. This study demonstrated that the use of electrocautery for subcutaneous incisions was associated with lower blood loss and lower postoperative pain compared to the cold-scalpel incisions in pregnant women undergoing repeat C-sections with Pfannenstiel incision. The study supports the recently shifting trend regarding the use of electrocautery instead of the scalpel.

show abstract

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Scalpel versus diathermy skin incision in Caesarean section

Cited by 8 publications

References 15 publications

Comparison between Cutting Diathermy and Surgical Scalpel for Skin Incision during Cesarean Section

Comparison between Cutting Diathermy and Surgical Scalpel for Skin Incision during Cesarean Section

The Case for Standardizing Cesarean Delivery Technique

Comparison of electrocautery and scalpel for blood loss and postoperative pain in Pfannenstiel incisions in recurrent cesarean sections: a randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About