Comparison of Wound Dehiscence in Cases of Laparotomy Closed by Continuous and Interrupted Technique

Background: Wound dehiscence is a serious postoperative complication following emergency laparotomy, associated with high morbidity and mortality. The choice of abdominal wall closure technique — continuous or interrupted — plays a key role in preventing this complication. Objective: To compare the frequency of wound dehiscence in cases of laparotomy closed by continuous versus interrupted techniques. Study Design: randomized controlled trial. Setting: The department of surgery, Saidu Sharif Medical College, Swat, Pakistan. Duration of Study: 10-01-2024 to 10-07-2024. Methods: A total of 184 patients undergoing emergency laparotomy were included and divided into two equal groups. Group A (n = 92) underwent closure with a continuous technique, while Group B (n = 92) underwent closure with an interrupted technique. Wound dehiscence was defined as the disruption of abdominal wall layers with serosanguinous discharge or evisceration within 15 postoperative days. Data were analyzed using SPSS, with a p-value <0.05 considered significant. Results: The mean age was 45.24 ± 16.02 years in Group A and 46.95 ± 15.43 years in Group B. In Group A, 57 (62.0%) were males and 35 (38.0%) females, while Group B included 54 (58.7%) males and 38 (41.3%) females. Wound dehiscence occurred significantly more frequently in the continuous group (16 patients, 17.4%) compared to the interrupted group (6 patients, 6.5%) (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The interrupted technique of laparotomy closure was associated with a significantly lower frequency of wound dehiscence compared to the continuous technique, suggesting it may be a safer option in emergency laparotomy cases.