Background-Aim: The technique of abdominal closure along with the material to be used is constantly evolving. The aim of the present study is to evaluate differences in midline laparotomy closure with a standard closu...Background-Aim: The technique of abdominal closure along with the material to be used is constantly evolving. The aim of the present study is to evaluate differences in midline laparotomy closure with a standard closure technique and new-fangled slow-absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures. Material and Methods: A prospective, comparative study of patients undergoing laparotomy closure with either STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) or STARLENE (Polypropylene) sutures during a 9 month period was performed. Patients were evaluated and compared in terms of surgical site infection, incisional hernia, burst abdomen, and suture sinus formation. Results: A total of 284 patients were included [141 in the STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) group and 143 in the STARLENE (Polypropylene) group]. Sinus formation was not noticed and no palpable knots were reported in both groups. Moreover burst abdomen was never encountered. Incisional hernia rates were similar for both suture materials: n = 6 (4.3%) for the STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) group and n = 5 (3.5%) for the STARLENE (Polypropylene) group. There was not statistically significant relationship between the type of suture that was used and wound infection: n = 5 (3.5%) in the STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) group and n = 6 (4.2%) in the STARLENE (Polypropylene) group. Complications did not occur in 96.1% of all patients. Conclusions: Our study suggests that there are no significant differences between these two new-fangled sutures. It seems that progress of suture materials has led to a step towards the goals of a beneficial suture and from then on complications of surgical wound closure should be merely a matter of operative technique.展开更多
文摘Background-Aim: The technique of abdominal closure along with the material to be used is constantly evolving. The aim of the present study is to evaluate differences in midline laparotomy closure with a standard closure technique and new-fangled slow-absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures. Material and Methods: A prospective, comparative study of patients undergoing laparotomy closure with either STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) or STARLENE (Polypropylene) sutures during a 9 month period was performed. Patients were evaluated and compared in terms of surgical site infection, incisional hernia, burst abdomen, and suture sinus formation. Results: A total of 284 patients were included [141 in the STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) group and 143 in the STARLENE (Polypropylene) group]. Sinus formation was not noticed and no palpable knots were reported in both groups. Moreover burst abdomen was never encountered. Incisional hernia rates were similar for both suture materials: n = 6 (4.3%) for the STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) group and n = 5 (3.5%) for the STARLENE (Polypropylene) group. There was not statistically significant relationship between the type of suture that was used and wound infection: n = 5 (3.5%) in the STARDIOX (Polydioxanone) group and n = 6 (4.2%) in the STARLENE (Polypropylene) group. Complications did not occur in 96.1% of all patients. Conclusions: Our study suggests that there are no significant differences between these two new-fangled sutures. It seems that progress of suture materials has led to a step towards the goals of a beneficial suture and from then on complications of surgical wound closure should be merely a matter of operative technique.
