Do different abdominal incision techniques play a role in wound complications in patients operated on for gastrointestinal malignancies ? "Scalpel vs. electrocautery".

BACKGROUND: Despite the studies of animals that demonstrate better wound healing after abdominal incisions with the use of a scalpel rather than electocautery, clinical experience does not confirm these findings. The purpose of this study was to compare the early postoperative and late-term wound complication rates between the scalpel and electrocautery in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies undergoing midline abdominal incisions.

METHODS: Patients undergoing midline abdominal incisions for gastrointestinal malignancies were randomly divided into two groups according to the method used to perform the incisions: scalpel or electrocautery. Complications were investigated, diagnosed and compared in the early postoperative and late-term follow-up periods. The independent samples, chi-square, and Student's t tests were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen patients were included to this study, of whom 97 (44.5%) were in the scalpel group and 121 (55.5%) in the electrocautery group. Both groups were similar with respect to their demographic, operative and postoperative characteristics. The analysis revealed no significant statistical differences in consideration of the incidences of either wound infection in the early postoperative period or incisional hernia in the late-term follow-up period between these two study groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: Scalpel and electrocautery are similar in terms of early postoperative and late-term wound complications when used to perform midline abdominal incisions. Therefore, the choice of method remains a matter of the surgeon's preference.