Interrupted Abdominal Closure Prevents Burst: Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Interrupted-X and Conventional Continuous Closures in Surgical and Gynecological Patients

Chandra Shekhar Agrawal, Pamit Tiwari, Sangeeta Mishra, Arpit Rao, Niladhar S. Hadke, Shailesh Adhikari, Anurag Srivastava

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Reduction in the risk of abdominal dehiscence with application of interrupted method of laparotomy closure and comparison with risk of burst with continuous method of closure. Three hundred forty eight patients undergoing laparotomy (114–elective gynecology, 114–emergency gynecology, 120–emergency surgery) were randomized into three arms to undergo closure with continuous, interrupted-X, and Modified Smead-Jones suturing techniques. Burst abdomen occurring up to 4 weeks of operation. Twenty-nine (8.33 %) of 348 patients developed burst in the post-operative period. 19 (15.70 %) of 121 patients in continuous arm developed burst. Five of 110 (4.55 %) patients in Interrupted-X arm and 5 of 117 (4.27 %) patients in Modified Smead-Jones arm developed burst. Interrupted suturing was associated with significant reduction in risk of burst when compared with continuous closure. Important predictors of burst were Intraperitoneal sepsis, cough, uremia, and surgical site infection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)270-276
Number of pages7
JournalIndian Journal of Surgery
Volume76
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Abdominal wound dehiscence
  • Burst abdomen
  • Emergency laparatomy
  • Gynecological surgery
  • Interrupted X suture
  • Prof Hughes’ far & near suture
  • Randomized trial

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Interrupted Abdominal Closure Prevents Burst: Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Interrupted-X and Conventional Continuous Closures in Surgical and Gynecological Patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this