Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aim: To analyze laparotomy closure of conventional midline and transverse abdominal incisions in elective and emergency laparotomies with a longterm, absorbent, elastic suture material. Method: Prospective, single centre, non randomised, controlled cohort study on short stitches with a longterm resorbable, elastic suture (material: poly-4-hydroxybutyrate) aiming at a 6:1 suture to wound (SL/WL) length ratio in midline and transverse, primary & secondary laparotomies for elective & emergency surgery. Results: We included 351 patients (♂: 208; ♀: 143), midline (n=194), transverse (n=103) and a combined midline/transverse L-shaped (n=54) incisions. There was no stitch performance quality difference between elective (n=296) and emergency (n=55) operations, while results in the first 150 patients showed a significantly reduced SL/WL-ratio to the following 200 suture closures (SL/WLratio: 5.64±2.5 vs 6.1±2.3, p<0.001). Average SL/WL-ratio in general was better for midline than transverse incision sutures (6.62±2.5 vs 4.3±1.51, p<0.001). SL/WL-ratio varied among the 6 surgeons participating, although results steadily improved and eventually approximated each other. Conclusions: We could show that a 6:1 SL/WL-ratio with a 2-0 single, ultra-long term, absorbent, elastic suture material can be significantly performed better in midline than transverse incisions. Transverse incisions should preferably be closed in 2 layers in order to achieve a sufficient SL/WL-ratio equivalent to the median incision. While on an individual level, results varied between surgeons, quality will improve and eventually approximate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Golling et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: