Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Microdermal Implants Show No Effect on Surrounding Tissue During Surgery With Electrocautery.
Sheldon, Rowan R; Loughren, Michael J; Marenco, Christopher W; Winters, James R; Bingham, Jason R; Martin, Matthew J; Eckert, Matthew J; Burney, Richard O.
Afiliação
  • Sheldon RR; Department of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington. Electronic address: rowan.r.sheldon.mil@mail.mil.
  • Loughren MJ; Department of Anesthesia and Operative Services, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
  • Marenco CW; Department of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
  • Winters JR; Department of Pathology, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
  • Bingham JR; Department of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
  • Martin MJ; Department of Surgery, Scripps Mercy Hospital, San Diego, California.
  • Eckert MJ; Department of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
  • Burney RO; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
J Surg Res ; 241: 72-77, 2019 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31009888
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Microdermal implants are an increasingly popular form of body jewelry. The potential for electrical conduction burn at the site of metal jewelry left in situ during electrosurgery has prompted surgical societies to recommend routine removal before surgery. To date, however, there is a lack of evidence to support this practice. We assessed in vivo thermal effect and tissue damage around implants during and after electrocautery. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Stainless steel microdermal anchors were surgically implanted into four swine. After allowing for initial healing, negative controls were excised and evaluated. An electrocautery grounding pad was placed 2 cm caudal to the implant. Continuous electrocautery (coagulation/30 W) for 30 s was applied to the skin 2 cm cranial to the implant. Surface skin temperature was recorded during electrocautery using thermal imaging. Tissue damage was assessed by gross examination and histologic evaluation. The same procedure was then performed to the contralateral nonimplanted side as a sham control.

RESULTS:

Electrocoagulation raised skin temperature around the electrocautery tip 27.7°C (Tmax 64.8°C). Skin temperature around the dermal implant rose 1.58°C (Tmax 38.6°C) compared with 2.03°C (Tmax 39.2°C) in the nonimplanted control skin (P = 0.627). Skin temperatures at implanted and control sites showed no statistical difference at any recorded time interval. Histologic review of excised tissue samples showed no evidence of thermal injury.

CONCLUSIONS:

Metallic implants appear to have no effect on skin temperature during the use of electrocautery even when in close proximity to both the electrocautery pen and return pad. Aggressive steps to remove microdermal implants before surgery may be unnecessary.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Modificação Corporal não Terapêutica / Eletrocoagulação / Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Dermatológicos / Complicações Intraoperatórias Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Modificação Corporal não Terapêutica / Eletrocoagulação / Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Dermatológicos / Complicações Intraoperatórias Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article