Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 42, Issue 12, pp 2755–2760 | Cite as

Electric cautery does not reduce blood loss in primary total knee arthroplasty compared with scalpel only surgery a double-blinded randomized controlled trial

  • Nattapol Tammachote
  • Supakit Kanitnate
Original Paper
  • 116 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to systematically compare blood loss between the electric cautery and scalpel used in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods

We performed a double-blind trial randomizing osteoarthritic knee patients undergoing unilateral TKA done by either using scalpel (group S) or cautery (group C). Primary outcomes were total blood loss calculated from maximum haemoglobin drop and blood loss collected in drain. Secondary outcomes were systemic inflammatory response (serum C-reactive protein), wound complications, and functional outcomes assessed over three months.

Results

A total of 80 patients were recruited. Group S had similar calculated total blood loss compared to group C (1070 (S) vs 1128 (C) mL, 95% CI − 219 to 103, p = 0.47). There was no difference in the mean drain-collected blood loss between the two groups (443 (S) vs 486 (C) mL, 95% CI − 128 to 47, p = 0.36). Group C had higher serum C-reactive protein level at 48 hours after TKA compare to group S (105 vs 140 mg/dL, 95% CI − 66 to − 4, p = 0.03). Wound complications and functional outcomes at three months were also similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Using electric cautery does not reduce total blood loss as we thought it would be in primary TKA compare to scalpel only surgery and it is also associated with a greater systemic inflammatory response. Cautery used in TKA which operated under tourniquet may not be worthwhile for the risk of hazardous smoke and the increasing cost.

Keywords

Scalpel Knife Electric cautery Blood loss Total knee arthroplasty 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Bob Taylor and Professor Norman Hangnail for reviewing the article and language help. We also thank all participants for providing the data used in this study.

Funding source

Our institution provided the funding for this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

The institutional review board approved the study protocol before the first patient enrollment (MTU-EC-OT-1-125/56). The study protocol was also registered in clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02108327). All patients provided written informed consent and agreed to participate in this trial.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Gandhi R, Evans HM, Mahomed SR, Mahomed NN (2013) Tranexamic acid and the reduction of blood loss in total knee and hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. BMC Res Notes 6:184.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-6-184 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Panteli M, Papakostidis C, Dahabreh Z, Giannoudis PV (2013) Topical tranexamic acid in total knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee 20(5):300–309.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2013.05.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosenthal BD, Haughom BD, Levine BR (2016) A retrospective analysis of hemostatic techniques in primary total knee arthroplasty: traditional electrocautery, bipolar sealer, and argon beam coagulation. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 45(4):E187–E191Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang C, Han Z, Zhang T, Ma JX, Jiang X, Wang Y, Ma XL (2014) The efficacy of a thrombin-based hemostatic agent in primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 9:90.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-014-0090-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim HJ, Fraser MR, Kahn B, Lyman S, Figgie MP (2012) The efficacy of a thrombin-based hemostatic agent in unilateral total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(13):1160–1165.  https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.k.00531 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yagishita K, Muneta T, Ikeda H (2003) Step-by-step measurements of soft tissue balancing during total knee arthroplasty for patients with varus knees. J Arthroplast 18(3):313–320.  https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2003.50088 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Plymale MF, Capogna BM, Lovy AJ, Adler ML, Hirsh DM, Kim SJ (2012) Unipolar vs bipolar hemostasis in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial. J Arthroplast 27(6):1133–7.e1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2011.09.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marulanda GA, Krebs VE, Bierbaum BE, Goldberg VM, Ries M, Ulrich SD, Seyler TM, Mont MA (2009) Hemostasis using a bipolar sealer in primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 38(12):E179–E183Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Massarweh NN, Cosgriff N, Slakey DP (2006) Electrosurgery: history, principles, and current and future uses. J Am Coll Surg 202(3):520–530.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.11.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ulmer BC (2008) The hazards of surgical smoke. AORN J 87(4):721–734 quiz 35–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Okoshi K, Kobayashi K, Kinoshita K, Tomizawa Y, Hasegawa S, Sakai Y (2015) Health risks associated with exposure to surgical smoke for surgeons and operation room personnel. Surg Today 45(8):957–965.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-014-1085-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cadeddu JA (2015) Re: lateral temperature spread of monopolar, bipolar and ultrasonic instruments for robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. J Urol 193(1):129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Taheri A, Mansoori P, Sandoval LF, Feldman SR, Pearce D, Williford PM (2014) Electrosurgery: part I. Basics and principles. J Am Acad Dermatol 70(4):591.e1–591.14; quiz 605–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2013.09.056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nadler SB, Hidalgo JH, Bloch T (1962) Prediction of blood volume in normal human adults. Surgery 51(2):224–232Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meunier A, Petersson A, Good L, Berlin G (2008) Validation of a haemoglobin dilution method for estimation of blood loss. Vox Sang 95(2):120–124.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1423-0410.2008.01071.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singh JA, Jensen MR, Harmsen WS, Gabriel SE, Lewallen DG (2011) Cardiac and thromboembolic complications and mortality in patients undergoing total hip and total knee arthroplasty. Ann Rheum Dis 70(12):2082–2088.  https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2010.148726 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kuptniratsaikul V, Rattanachaiyanont M (2007) Validation of a modified Thai version of the western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index for knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 26(10):1641–1645.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-007-0560-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liao G, Wen S, Xie X, Wu Q (2016) Harmonic scalpel versus monopolar electrocauterization in cholecystectomy. Jsls 20(3).  https://doi.org/10.4293/jsls.2016.00037
  19. 19.
    Hill SE, Broomer B, Stover J, White W, Richardson W (2012) Bipolar tissue sealant device decreases hemoglobin loss in multilevel spine surgery. Transfusion 52(12):2594–2599.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1537-2995.2012.03649.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Prasad N, Padmanabhan V, Mullaji A (2007) Blood loss in total knee arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors. Int Orthop 31(1):39–44.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-006-0096-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sehat KR, Evans R, Newman JH (2000) How much blood is really lost in total knee arthroplasty? Correct blood loss management should take hidden loss into account. Knee 7(3):151–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sehat KR, Evans RL, Newman JH (2004) Hidden blood loss following hip and knee arthroplasty. Correct management of blood loss should take hidden loss into account. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 86(4):561–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ugras AA, Kural C, Kural A, Demirez F, Koldas M, Cetinus E (2011) Which is more important after total knee arthroplasty: local inflammatory response or systemic inflammatory response? Knee 18(2):113–116.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2010.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hall GM, Peerbhoy D, Shenkin A, Parker CJ, Salmon P (2001) Relationship of the functional recovery after hip arthroplasty to the neuroendocrine and inflammatory responses. Br J Anaesth 87(4):537–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bisinotto FMB, Dezena RA, Martins LB, Galvao MC, Sobrinho JM, Calcado MS (2017) Burns related to electrosurgery—report of two cases. Rev Bras Anestesiol 67(5):527–534.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjan.2016.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tomita Y, Mihashi S, Nagata K, Ueda S, Fujiki M, Hirano M, Hirohata T (1981) Mutagenicity of smoke condensates induced by CO2-laser irradiation and electrocauterization. Mutat Res 89(2):145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Prasad N, Padmanabhan V, Mullaji A (2005) Comparison between two methods of drain clamping after total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 125(6):381–384.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-005-0813-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pearle AD, Scanzello CR, George S, Mandl LA, DiCarlo EF, Peterson M, Sculco TP, Crow MK (2007) Elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels are associated with local inflammatory findings in patients with osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 15(5):516–523.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2006.10.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of MedicineThammasat UniversityKhlong LuangThailand

Personalised recommendations