Research

Diathermy v. scalpel Pfannenstiel incision in repeated caesarean sections: A randomised controlled trial

A A Mageed, I A El-Fotoh, R Fouad, N Gamal, E N Salama, M Abdel-Rasheed, D Farouk

Abstract


Background. Most surgeons do not choose diathermy over scalpel skin incision, as they speculate that the thermal effect produced owing to tissue resistance to electrical current may lead to postoperative pain, delayed wound healing and wound complications.
Objective. To compare the use of cutting diathermy skin incision with scalpel skin incision with regard to incision time, haemostasis, postoperative pain, wound healing and wound complications.

Methods. A randomised controlled ‎trial was performed on 476 women who underwent caesarean sections. They were randomised into two groups: group 1 (women scheduled for conventional scalpel skin incision) and group 2 (women scheduled for cutting diathermy skin incision).
Results. The incision time, blood loss, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and doses needed for analgesia were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 (p<0.001). The groups did not show any significant difference regarding wound complications. Wound healing in both groups was by primary intention.

Conclusions. Diathermy skin incision is superior to scalpel skin incision, with no postoperative pain and good wound healing.


Authors' affiliations

A A Mageed, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt

I A El-Fotoh, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt

R Fouad, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt

N Gamal, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Defense Industrial Medical Centre, Cairo, Egypt

E N Salama, Department of Reproductive Health Research, National Research Centre, Cairo, Egypt

M Abdel-Rasheed, Department of Reproductive Health Research, National Research Centre, Cairo, Egypt

D Farouk, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt

Full Text

PDF (626KB)

Cite this article

South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2021;27(1):. DOI:10.7196/sajog.1646

Article History

Date submitted: 2022-03-09
Date published: 2022-03-09

Article Views

Abstract views: 12807
Full text views: 722

Comments on this article

*Read our policy for posting comments here


The South African Medical Association is the official publisher of the SAJOG.

                                                           

                                        SOUTH AFRICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

                                                         Events | Careers | CPD

 

The South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology| Online ISSN: 2305-8862 | Print ISSN: 0038-2329 | 

Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial Works License (CC BY-NC 4.0) | 

This journal is protected by a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial Works License (CC BY-NC 4.0) | Read our privacy policy.

SAMA Journals: South African Medical Journal African Journal of Health Professions Education South African Journal of Bioethics and Law South African Journal of Child Health | Southern African Journal of Critical Care  | South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology | Undergraduate Research in Health African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine  | Southern African Journal of Public Health