Surgical site infection: An observer-blind, randomized trial comparing electrocautery and conventional scalpel

AimTo evaluate the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) based on the type of scalpel used for incisions in the skin and in subcutaneous tissues.MethodsObserver-blind, randomized equivalence clinical trial with two arms (electrocautery versus conventional scalpel) which evaluated 133 women undergoing elective abdominal gynecologic oncology surgery. A simple randomization stratified by body mass index (BMI: 30 kg/m2) was carried out. Women were evaluated at 14 and 30 days following the operation. A multivariate analysis was performed in order to check whether the type of scalpel would be a risk factor for SSI.ResultsGroup arms were balanced for all variables, excepted for surgical time, which was significantly higher in the electrocautery group (mean: 161.1 versus 203.5 min, P = 0.029). The rates of SSI were 7.4% and 9.7%, respectively, for the conventional scalpel and electrocautery groups (P = 0.756). The exploratory multivariate model identified body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 (OR = 24.2, 95% CI: 2.8–212.1) and transverse surgical incision (OR = 8.1, 95% CI: 1.5–42.6) as independent risk factors for SSI. The type of scalpel used in surgery, when adjusted for these variables and the surgery time, was not a risk factor for SSI.ConclusionThis study showed that the SSI rates for conventional scalpel and electrocautery were not significantly different. These results were consistent with others reported in the literature and would not allow a surgeon to justify scalpel choice based on SSI.Trial number: NCT01410175 (Clinical Trials – NIH).