Diathermy Versus Conventional Scalpel in Making an Abdominal Incision: A Prospective Study

• Published in: Journal of clinical and diagnostic research Vol. 13; no. 10; pp. PC09 - PC11
• Main Authors: Pandey, Shruti, Choubey, Rajendra Prasad, Narain, Indra Tiwari
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: JCDR Research and Publications Private Limited 01.10.2019
• Subjects: electrosection; incision; scalpel incision; wound infection
• ISSN: 2249-782X; 0973-709X
• DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2019/42093.13219

Introduction: Scalpel incisions produce nominal harm to neighboring and adjacent tissues. Diathermy is considered to be an efficient mode of incision and its use is widespread, but due to scarring potential, advanced wound contamination rate and poor wound healing, the extensive use of surgical diathermy for incisions. Aim: To compare the use of electrosurgery and conventional scalpel in making an abdominal incision with respect to blood loss, operating time, wound infection rate and post-operative pain. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective study in which patients above 16 years of age were included and all patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomly allocated to two arms of the study. In Group A, incision by conventional scalpel and in group B, incision by diathermy were made. Incisions were of three types i.e., Kocher’s incision were 4, Midline were 22 and Pfannestiel were 44. Data was collected and entered in the Microsoft excel sheet and analysed for blood loss, operating time, wound infection rate and post-operative pain. Results: Total number of patients included in this study was 70. Age of the participants were in range of second to seventh decade, youngest being 19 years and the oldest being 73 Years of age. Male and female ratio was 1:6. Time taken for incision and blood loss in group B is less than group A respectively. (p=0.009, p=0.001) in all types of incision. Rate of complications following electrocautery incision were also low and no haematoma or seroma were noted in those wounds. Conclusion: Diathermy technique is compatible with conventional scalpel being safe, effective and simple. Less blood loss was noted with clearer field of dissection, as compared to one created by conventional steel scalpel. Because of the faster haemostasis, the mean time of making an incision was also less in case of diathermy.