A study to compare abdominal wall closure with interrupted vs. continuous sutures using polydioxanone in patients undergoing emergency exploratory laparotomy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20243236Keywords:
Continuous sutures, Emergency laparotomy, Interrupted suturesAbstract
Background: Wound closure in emergency surgeries can be done either by interrupted or by continuous sutures with each having its own advantages and disadvantages. In this paper we shall try to compare the advantages and adverse effects of both these methods of wound closure.
Methods: A prospective comparative study involving 50 patients undergoing emergency laparotomies was conducted in Department of General Surgery, MMIMSR, Mullana from October 2022 to April 2024 (18 months). We compared two abdominal wall closure techniques using polydioxanone (PDS), patients, aged 18-75 years, were alternatively assigned to one of two groups: Group I received interrupted PDS sutures, while Group II received continuous PDS sutures. Postoperatively, pain and complications like infections were observed and analysed statistically.
Results: In our study, we compared abdominal wall closure techniques in emergency exploratory laparotomy patients. The mean age was similar in the two groups, 43.68 years vs 43.08 years respectively in group I and II. Wound infection occurred in 44% of patients in the interrupted suture group and 60% in the continuous suture group, with a significant difference favouring the interrupted method. The mean wound closure time (33.24 vs 18.32 minutes) and post operative pain were more in the interrupted suture group as compared to the continuous suture group.
Conclusions: The interrupted suturing method proved to be more effective in preventing complications, it did require more time to perform. However, after thoroughly reviewing the available data, no definitive evidence was found to support the superiority of either techniques.
References
Saunders DI, Murray D, Peden CJ. Variations in mortality after emergency laparotomy: the first report of the UK emergency laparotomy network. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109:368-75.
Ilyas C, Jones J, Fortey S. Management of the patient presenting for emergency laparotomy. BJA education. 2019;19(4):11-38.
Agrawal V. Role of suture material and technique of closure in wound outcome following laparotomy for peritonitis. Trop Gastroenterol. 2009;30(4):237-40.
Heger P, Pianka F, Diener MK. Current standards of abdominal wall closure techniques: conventional suture techniques. Chirurg. 2016;87:737-43.
Smyth ET, McIlvenny G, Enstone JE. Four country healthcare associated infection prevalence survey 2006: overview of the results. J Hosp Infect. 2008;69:230-48.
Culver DH, Horan TC, Gaynes RP. Surgical wound infection rates by wound class, operative procedure, and patient risk index. National nosocomial infections surveillance system. Am J Med. 1991;91(3B):152S-7S.
Ray JA, Doddi N, Regula D, Williams JA, Melveger A. Polydioxanone (PDS), a novel monofilament synthetic absorbable suture. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;153(4):497-507.
Kokotovic D, Gögenur I, Helgstrand F. Substantial variation among hernia experts in the decision for treatment of patients with incisional hernia: a descriptive study on agreement. Hernia. 2017;21:271-8.
Sharma G, Prashar N, Gandotra N. Comparison of suture technique (interrupted vs. continuous) with respect to wound dehiscence. Indian J Med Sci. 2020;72(3):191-4.
Sharma AC, Gupta AK, Singh N, Maurya AK and Singla M. Comparison of continuous versus interrupted abdominal fascia closure using polydioxanone suture in laparotomy. Int Surg J. 2019;8:6.
Rahman M, Azad AS, Mawla MG, Alam MM, Rahman M. Outcome of abdominal wound closure following continuous and interrupted suture in elective laparotomy. Faridpur Med Coll J. 2013;8(2):73-6.