مجله علمی پژوهشی سازمان نظام پزشکی
Volume 33, Issue 3 (2015)                   jmciri 2015, 33(3): 0-0 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Comparative analysis of using Electrocauter and Scalpel in midline laparotomy patients who reffered to Loghman Hakim Hospital between 2012 to 2013. jmciri 2015; 33 (3)
URL: http://jmciri.ir/article-1-1792-en.html
Abstract:   (3425 Views)

Introduction :

For many years surgical incisions were done by scalpel. Nowadays this method has been replaced with

Electrocautery.Each of these methods has their disadvantages and benefits. The purpose of this study is to compare these two methods in midline laparotomy surgeries.

Methods :

 From 2012 until 2013, One hundred patients enter the study, underwent midline laparotomy and were divided into two Groups .In one group scalpel and in the other group Electrocauterywere  used .

The speed of surgical resection, bleeding, postoperative pain and other wound complications were compared between two groups.

Finding :

In this study, the mean and standard deviation speed was calculated based on centimeter per minutes .

In Electracautery group result was 10.64+_3.052 and in scalpel group was 8.26+_3.61.The average Andstandard deviation of the bleeding based on number of bloody used gauzes in Electracautery group was .97+_.37 and in other group was 2.26+_1.25.Wound complications among the patients with Electrocauter usage were 8.2% versus 11.8% in the other group.

Discussion and conclusion:

Amount of pain and wound complication were similar in two groups .However, using Electrocautery device increases the speed of operation and decreases bleeding amount .Therefore ,surgical scalpel can be replaced by Electrocauter.

Full-Text [PDF 349 kb]   (2108 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: General

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.