首页> 外文期刊>Annals of Surgery >Interrupted or continuous slowly absorbable sutures for closure of primary elective midline abdominal incisions: a multicenter randomized trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541).
【24h】

Interrupted or continuous slowly absorbable sutures for closure of primary elective midline abdominal incisions: a multicenter randomized trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541).

机译:中断或连续缓慢吸收缝线以闭合腹部择期原发性切口:一项多中心随机试验(INSECT:ISRCTN24023541)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: In patients undergoing midline incisions, the abdominal fascia can be closed with a continuous or interrupted suture using various materials. The aim of this study is to compare: (1) interrupted technique with rapidly absorbable sutures and (2) continuous techniques with different slowly absorbable sutures, focusing on the incidence of incisional hernias within 1 year. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A meta-analysis suggested that the incidence of incisional hernias can be more effectively reduced with slowly absorbable continuous sutures. METHODS: Multicenter randomized surgical trial with 3 parallel groups. Patients were scheduled for primary elective midline incisions. All surgeons were trained (4:1 suture wound length in continuous groups) and monitored. Primary end point, measured within 1 year after surgery, was the frequency of incisional hernias diagnosed by clinical examination and confirmed by ultrasound. Complications and safety were used as secondary end points. This study has been registered with the ISRCTN Register (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541). RESULTS: Conducted on 625 randomized patients (210 interrupted Vicryl, 205 continuous polydioxanone suture (PDS), 210 continuous Monoplus), the primary analysis showed an incidence of 28 incisional hernias (15.9%) versus 15 (8.4%) versus 22 (12.5%) for the 3 closure techniques, respectively (P = 0.09). No significant difference was observed between the 3 groups with regard to burst abdomen (4 [2.0%] vs. 6 [3.0%] vs. 8 [4.0%], P = 0.46), wound infection (26 [12.7%] vs. 39 [19.4%] vs. 33 [16.3%], P = 0.19), pulmonary infections (9 [4.4%] vs. 5 [2.5%] vs. 5 [2.5%], P = 0.46), serious adverse events (63 [30.0%] vs. 57 [27.8%] vs. 61 [29.1%], P = 0.89), and 1-year mortality (16 [7.9%] vs. 11 [5.5%] vs. 16 [7.9%], P = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of incisional hernias and the frequency of wound infection was higher than expected in all groups. New concepts need to be developed and studied to substantially reduce the frequency of incisional hernias.
机译:目的:在进行中线切口的患者中,可以使用各种材料连续缝合或间断缝合来闭合腹部筋膜。本研究的目的是比较:(1)采用快速吸收性缝线的间断技术和(2)使用不同缓慢吸收性缝线的连续技术,重点是一年内切口疝的发生率。背景数据摘要:一项荟萃分析表明,使用可缓慢吸收的连续缝合线可以更有效地减少切口疝的发生率。方法:3个平行组的多中心随机手术试验。患者计划进行原发性择期中线切口。所有的外科医师都接受了培训(连续组缝合伤口长度为4:1)并进行了监测。手术后1年内测得的主要终点是经临床检查诊断并经超声证实的切开疝的发生频率。并发症和安全性被用作次要终点。该研究已在ISRCTN寄存器(INSECT:ISRCTN24023541)中进行了注册。结果:对625例随机患者(210例Vicryl中断,205例连续聚二恶烷酮缝合线(PDS),210例Monoplus连续缝合)进行了初步分析,结果显示28例切开疝发生率(15.9%)比15例(8.4%)vs 22例(12.5%) )分别用于3种封闭技术(P = 0.09)。在腹部爆裂方面,三组之间无显着差异(4 [2.0%] vs. 6 [3.0%] vs. 8 [4.0%],P = 0.46),伤口感染(26 [12.7%]vs。 39 [19.4%]比33 [16.3%],P = 0.19),肺部感染(9 [4.4%]比5 [2.5%] vs 5 [2.5%],P = 0.46),严重不良事件( 63 [30.0%]对57 [27.8%]对61 [29.1%],P = 0.89)和1年死亡率(16 [7.9%]对11 [5.5%]对16 [7.9%] ,P = 0.54)。结论:切口疝的发生率和伤口感染的频率均高于所有组。需要开发和研究新的概念,以大大减少切开疝的发生频率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号