Abstract
Purpose: :
To compare the efficacy of standard surgical paper drape versus aluminum foil drape at minimizing the risk of wound infection in select oculoplastic surgeries performed in two outpatient settings.
Methods: :
A retrospective case series of 294 consecutive patients who underwent ectropion or entropion repair, levator resection or advancement, or blepharoplasty by a single surgeon using either standard surgical drape (n = 73) in a hospital-based ambulatory surgery center or aluminium foil drape (n = 221) in an office-based surgery suite was performed. The rates of wound infection in the 2 groups were evaluated at 1 day and 7 to 10 days postoperatively. Statistical analysis (2-sample t test) could not be applied due to the absence of any difference in the data from the two groups.
Results: :
Seventy-three cases (21 blepharoplasty, 14 levator resection/advancement, 22 ectropion repair, 16 entropion repair) were performed in a hospital-based ambulatory surgery center using standard surgical paper drape. Two hundred and twenty-one cases (98 blepharoplasty, 85 levator resection/advancement, 4 ectropion repair, 34 entropion repair) were performed in an office-based surgery suite using aluminum foil drape. There was no incident (0) of wound infection in the 294 cases reviewed at either the 1-day or 7- to 10-day postoperative visits. There was no difference between the two groups' rates of wound infection.
Conclusions: :
Aluminum foil drape is as effective as standard surgical paper drape at minimizing the risk of wound infection in oculoplastic surgical procedures performed in the outpatient setting.
Keywords: clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: outcomes/complications • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: systems/equipment/techniques • eyelid