Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Comparison between Scalpel Incision and Diathermy Incision in Elective Midline Abdominal Surgery

View through CrossRef
Introduction: Midline abdominal surgeries also need an accurate approach toward appropriate incisions to ensure safer surgery and better results. The scalpel has been used in the past, but there is evidence showing that diathermy incisions have certain benefits, both in blood loss and incision time. This study compares the efficacy and safety of these two techniques. Objectives: The aim was to compare between scalpel and diathermy incisions in terms of incision time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, and wound healing in elective midline abdominal surgeries. Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial occurred in Recep Tayyip Erdogan Hospital, Muzaffargarh, from 15 September, 2024 to 14 March, 2025. A total of 102 patients were selected and randomized as the scalpel group and diathermy group. Incision time, blood loss, postoperative pain (Measuring by VAS), and wound healing were recorded in the SPSS v.25 software and analyzed. Results: Diathermy also had the added advantages of reducing the incision time and the amount of blood loss compared to the scalpel. The Diathermy treatment group recorded fewer pains than the control group on the days after the operation. There is no significant difference between wound healing and surgical site infections. Conclusion: Diathermy incisions make surgery more effective and less uncomfortable for the patient without adding to the risk factors which are always associated with scalpel incisions.
Title: Comparison between Scalpel Incision and Diathermy Incision in Elective Midline Abdominal Surgery
Description:
Introduction: Midline abdominal surgeries also need an accurate approach toward appropriate incisions to ensure safer surgery and better results.
The scalpel has been used in the past, but there is evidence showing that diathermy incisions have certain benefits, both in blood loss and incision time.
This study compares the efficacy and safety of these two techniques.
Objectives: The aim was to compare between scalpel and diathermy incisions in terms of incision time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, and wound healing in elective midline abdominal surgeries.
Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial occurred in Recep Tayyip Erdogan Hospital, Muzaffargarh, from 15 September, 2024 to 14 March, 2025.
A total of 102 patients were selected and randomized as the scalpel group and diathermy group.
Incision time, blood loss, postoperative pain (Measuring by VAS), and wound healing were recorded in the SPSS v.
25 software and analyzed.
Results: Diathermy also had the added advantages of reducing the incision time and the amount of blood loss compared to the scalpel.
The Diathermy treatment group recorded fewer pains than the control group on the days after the operation.
There is no significant difference between wound healing and surgical site infections.
Conclusion: Diathermy incisions make surgery more effective and less uncomfortable for the patient without adding to the risk factors which are always associated with scalpel incisions.

Related Results

SKIN INCISIONS WITH DIATHERMY AND SCALPEL IN ABDOMINAL SURGERY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY.
SKIN INCISIONS WITH DIATHERMY AND SCALPEL IN ABDOMINAL SURGERY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY.
Skin incisions are made traditionally with scalpel. The cutting diathermy for making surgical incision has met with scepticism because of possible excessive scarring, impaired woun...
Bikini Incision Modification of the Direct Anterior Approach
Bikini Incision Modification of the Direct Anterior Approach
Background: Although the direct anterior approach (DAA) represents an intermuscular and internervous approach to total hip arthroplasty (THA), it did not reach global a...
Surgical Diathermy versus Scalpel Incision in Elective Surgery: A Comparative Study
Surgical Diathermy versus Scalpel Incision in Elective Surgery: A Comparative Study
Background: Ancient scalpels were found in a Bronze age settlement older than 2100 BC in Turkey. Since that time it has been used in surgery. Surgical diathermy was introduced at t...
Thromboembolic Events In Elective vs Non-Elective Foot & Ankle Surgery
Thromboembolic Events In Elective vs Non-Elective Foot & Ankle Surgery
Category: Ankle, Arthroscopy, Hindfoot, Lesser Toes, Midfoot/Forefoot, Sports, Trauma Introduction/Purpose: The occurrence of venous thromboembolisms (VTE) in the management of foo...
Surgical site infection rates in scalp incisions for cranial surgeries; a comparison of scalpel and cutting electrocautery
Surgical site infection rates in scalp incisions for cranial surgeries; a comparison of scalpel and cutting electrocautery
Background: Traditionally, the scalpel, has been the device used to make incisions on the skin. It is readily available, cheap and makes precise cuts on the skin. However, there ma...
Harmonic Scalpel vs Diathermy Tonsillectomy.
Harmonic Scalpel vs Diathermy Tonsillectomy.
Objective: To determine whether harmonic scalpel has any advantage over monopolar diathermy tonsillectomy or not in terms of blood loss, duration of surgery, pain scores and slough...
COMPARISON BETWEEN POSTOPERATIVE DRAIN OUTPUT AFTER THYROIDECTOMY WITH AND WITHOUT USE OF HARMONIC SCALPEL DEVICE
COMPARISON BETWEEN POSTOPERATIVE DRAIN OUTPUT AFTER THYROIDECTOMY WITH AND WITHOUT USE OF HARMONIC SCALPEL DEVICE
Abstract: Introduction: Thyroid gland is one of the most important endocrine organs in human body performing multiple functions to maintain homeostasis. Thyroid nodular disea...
Renal Ewing Sarcoma: A Case Report and Literature Review
Renal Ewing Sarcoma: A Case Report and Literature Review
Abstract Introduction Primary renal Ewing sarcoma is an extremely rare and aggressive tumor, representing less than 1% of all renal tumors. This case report contributes valuable in...

Back to Top