Shaimaa El Shemy
Giza, Cairo Governorate, 11562, Egypt
NCT Number: NCT06352853
This study aims to compare between using of diathermy versus scalpel in making skin incision during cesarean section to judge the variations in incisional time, incisional blood loss, postoperative pain, wound healing and wound complications.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–40 year
Female
Interventional
Not applicable
Giza, Cairo Governorate, 11562, Egypt
Surgical scalpels are traditionally used for skin incisions during a Caesarean delivery; the great evolutions in electrosurgical devices bring an alternative method for skin incision by the usage of cutting diathermy.
The current comparative study was conducted in Kasr Al-Ainy hospital obstetric theaters between January 2022 and June 2022. Consents were obtained from all participants. 120 participants were included in this study, divided into 2 groups 60 in each group;Diathermy group and scalpel group respectively .
In both groups:
Also incision blood loss was calculated by weighing the swabs pre and postoperatively (1mg = 1ml). In incisional site no suction was used.
•Also hemodynamic changes were compared between both groups that include: blood pressure (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial blood pressure), pulse, oxygen saturation and electrocardiogram (ECG) changes.
Closure of the skin in all cesarean sections was done by proline 2.0 for assessment of wound healing and complications.
Postoperatively, the postoperative pain was compared for 24 hours by visual analogue scale (VAS) score, It is 11 points numeric scale ranges from "0" representing one pain extreme (e.g.: no pain) to "10" representing the other pain extreme (e.g.: "pain as bad as you can imagine" or "worst pain imaginable") this will be recorded at 2,4, 6,8, 10,12, 24 hours postoperatively.
Lastly, wound healing was compared in both groups and complications like seroma, hematoma, ecchymosis, dehiscence and infection. The presence or absence of infection was assessed by Southampton grading system as following:
G0: normal wound healing, G1: normal healing with mild bruising or erythema, G2: erythema plus other signs of inflammation, G3: clear or serosanguinous discharge and G4: purulent discharge and in this case wound culture was performed.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Skin incision by diathermy
Skin incision by scalpel
Time frame: 5 months
The incision time was estimated by using digital clock, time established as follows: when skin incision made, the surgeon called out "start the clock". After opening the rectus sheath, the surgeon called out" stop the clock". Incision time is the difference between "start" and "stop".
Time frame: 5 months
incision blood loss volume was measured by weighing the swabs pre and postoperatively (1mg = 1ml).
Time frame: 5 months
Evaluation of post operative pain for 24 hours by visual analogue scale
Time frame: 5 months
Postoperative wound complications like seroma, hematoma, ecchymosis, dehiscence (separation of the subcutaneous tissues with skin) and infection. The presence or absence of infection was assessed by Southampton grading system as following: G0: normal wound healing, G1: normal healing with mild bruising or erythema, G2: erythema plus other signs of inflammation, G3: clear or serosanguinous discharge and G4: purulent discharge and in this case wound culture was performed.
Cairo University
Other
A Comparative Study Between the Use of Scalpel Versus Diathermy in Opening the Transverse Abdominal Skin Incision During Cesarean Section
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT05112679
Amputation, Amputation; Traumatic, Foot
Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05517902
Burns, Skin Wound
Madison, Wisconsin, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06575088
Complication of Surgical Procedure, Skin Wound
Bursa, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial DetailsNCT06552481
Skin Wound, Soft Tissue Injuries
San Antonio, Texas, United States
View Trial Details