A comparative study of primary skin and subcutaneous tissue closure and open skin technique in emergency laparotomy for perforative peritonitis: an observational and prospective study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20185466Keywords:
Delayed primary closure, Primary closure, Surgical site infectionAbstract
Background: Surgical site infections (SSI) are major complications following laparotomy for perforative peritonitis largely affecting the quality of life, increasing morbidity and mortality. The study conducted seeks the factors that may be associated with post-operative surgical site infection.
Methods: A comprehensive observational and prospective study reporting advantages and disadvantages of Primary Closure (PC) and Delayed Primary Closure (DPC) for SSI, duration of hospital stay and morbidity following various aetiologies of perforative peritonitis requiring emergency laparotomy.
Results: Incidence of SSI was less in the DPC group (7.4%) compared to the PC group (42.9%) (p= 0.0040. Length of hospital stay was comparable in both groups, mean 13.52 days in the DPC group versus 14.07 days in the PC group (p=0.586). Significantly higher rates of SSI were found in patients with ASA grade >2 (p=0.012). Duration of surgery >4 hours and intra-operative transfusion were also found to have higher rates of SSI, but these differences were not significant (p=0.181 in both cases). Incidence of SSI did not have any co-relation with site of perforation.
Conclusions: SSI increases the hospital stay by approximately 5 days average. DPC significantly reduces the incidence of SSI in perforative peritonitis patients but the advantage of DPC over PC is questionable. Patients with ASA grades >2 were found to have significantly higher rates of SSI. Patients with >4hours surgery and patients with intra-operative transfusion also had higher rates of SSI, but this was not significant. Site of perforation have no co-relation with incidence of SSI.
References
Sabiston Textbook of Surgery - The Biological Basis Of Modern Surgical Practise. 19th ed. Elsevier Saunders. Philadelphia; 2012:283-288,1108-1109.
Gurlyik G. Factors affecting disruption of surgical abdominal incisions in early postoperative period Ulus Travma Derg. 2001;7:96-9.
Yalcin AN, Bakir M, Bakici Z, Dökmetas I, Sabir N. Postoperative wound infections. J Hospital Infection. 1995 Apr 1;29(4):305-9.
Patil PV, Kamat MM, Hindalekar MM. Spectrum of perforative peritonitis-a prospective study of 150 cases. Bombay Hospital J. 2012;54(1):38-50.
Bhangu A, Singh P, Lundy J, Bowley DM. Systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing primary vs delayed primary skin closure in contaminated and dirty abdominal incisions. JAMA Surgery. 2013 Aug 1;148(8):779-86.
Khan KI, Mahmood S, Akmal M, Waqas A. Comparison of rate of surgical wound infection, length of hospital stay and patient convenience in complicated appendicitis between primary closure and delayed primary closure. Age. 2012 Jun 1;35(14.55):31-8.
Chiang RA, Chen SL, Tsai YC. Delayed primary closure versus primary closure for wound management in perforated appendicitis: A prospective randomized controlled trial. J Chinese Med Association. 2012 Apr 1;75(4):156-9.
Duttaroy DD, Jitendra J, Duttaroy B, Bansal U, Dhameja P, Patel G. Management strategy for dirty abdominal incisions: primary or delayed primary closure? A randomized trial. Surgical Infections. 2009 Apr 1;10(2):129-36.
Henry MC, Moss RL. Primary versus delayed wound closure in complicated appendicitis: an international systematic review and meta-analysis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2005 Aug 1;21(8):625-30.
Cohn SM, Giannotti G, Ong AW, Varela JE, Shatz DV, McKenney MG, et al. Prospective randomized trial of two wound management strategies for dirty abdominal wounds. Ann Surg. 2001 Mar;233(3):409.
Rucinski J, Fabian T, Panagopoulos G, Schein M, Wise L. Gangrenous and perforated appendicitis: a meta-analytic study of 2532 patients indicates that the incision should be closed primarily. Surg. 2000 Feb 1;127(2):136-41.
Tsang TM, Tam PK, Saing H. Delayed primary wound closure using skin tapes for advanced appendicitis in children: a prospective, controlled study. Arch Surg. 1992 Apr 1;127(4):451-3.
Pettigrew RA. Delayed primary wound closure in gangrenous and perforated appendicitis. Br J Surg. 1981 Sep;68(9):635-8.
Andersen B, Bendtsen A, Holbraad L, et al. Wound infections after appendectomy. Acta Chir Scand 1972;138:531-6.
Grosfeld JL, Solit RW. Prevention of wound infection in perforated appendicitis: experience with delayed primary wound closure. Ann Surgery. 1968 Nov;168(5):891-5.
Karamercan A, Bostanc H, Mentes BB, Leventoglu S. Closed Drainage of the Incisional Surgical Site Infections Prevent Wound Disruption in Colorectal Surgery. World Applied Sci J. 2008;4(4):554-7.
Mawalla B, Mshana SE, Chalya PL, Imirzalioglu C, Mahalu W. Predictors of surgical site infections among patients undergoing major surgery at Bugando Medical Centre in Northwestern Tanzania. BMC Surg. 2011 Dec;11(1):21.
Kaya E, Paksoy’ E, Ozturk’ E, Sigirli D, Bilgel’ H. Subcutaneous closed-suction drainage does not affect surgical site infection rate following elective abdominal operations: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Acta Chirurgica Belgica. 2010 Jan 1;110(4):457-62.
Ahmed M, Alam SN, Khan O, Manzar S. Postoperative wound infection: a surgeon’s dilemma. Pak J Surg. 2007 Jan;23(1):41-7.
Sahu S, Shergill J, Sachan P, Gupta P. Superficial incisional surgical site infection in elective abdominal surgeries-A prospective study. Internet J Surg. 2011;26(1):514-24.
Anvikar AR, Deshmukh AB, Karyakarte RP, Damle AS, Patwardhan NS, Malik AK, et al. One year prospective study of 3280 surgical wounds. Indian J Med Microbiol. 1999 Jul 1;17(3):129.
Kasatpibal N, Nørgaard M, Sørensen HT, Schønheyder HC, Jamulitrat S, Chongsuvivatwong V. Risk of surgical site infection and efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis: a cohort study of appendectomy patients in Thailand. BMC Infectious diseases. 2006 Dec;6(1):111.
