Skin closure following abdominal wall reconstruction: three-layer skin suture versus staples

Skin closure following abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) has received little attention, even though these patients have demonstrated insufficient wound healing. This study assessed the postoperative wound-related complications and patient-reported outcomes after skin closure using single- or tripl...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of plastic surgery and hand surgery 2022-12, Vol.56 (6), p.342-347
Hauptverfasser: Gaspar, F. J. L., Hensler, M., Vester-Glowinski, P. V., Jensen, K. K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Skin closure following abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) has received little attention, even though these patients have demonstrated insufficient wound healing. This study assessed the postoperative wound-related complications and patient-reported outcomes after skin closure using single- or triple layer closure following AWR. This was a retrospective study at a University Hospital from 2016 to 2018. Patients were grouped into a single-layer cohort (SLC) and a triple-layer cohort (TLC). Skin incisions closed with either technique were compared. Postoperative complications were registered from chart review (SLC: n = 48, TLC: n = 40). Patient reported-outcomes were assessed through the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) and the Hernia Related Quality of Life survey. A total of 51 patients were included (SLC: n = 26, TLC: n = 25). There was no difference in wound complications after single- or triple-layer skin closure; seroma (SLC: 16.7% vs. TLC: 15%, p = 1.00), surgical site infection (SLC: 4.2% vs. TLC: 7.5%, p = .834), hematoma (SLC: 6.2% vs. TLC: 2.5%, p = .744) and wound rupture (SLC: 2.1% vs. TLC: 2.5%, p = 1.00). Patients who had incisions closed using single-layer closure were more satisfied; PSAQ satisfaction with scar symptoms (SLC: 6.7 points (IQR 0.0-18.3) vs. TLC: 26.7 points (IQR 0.0-33.3), p = .039) and scar aesthetics (SLC 25.9 points (IQR 18.5-33.3) vs. TLC: 37.0 (IQR 29.6-44.4), p = .013). There was no difference in 30-day wound complications after either skin closure technique. The results favoured the single-layer closure technique regarding the cosmetic outcome. Abbreviations: AWR: abdominal wall reconstruction; SLC: single-layer cohort; TLC: triple-layer cohort; PSAQ: patient scar assessment questionnaire; IH: incisional hernia; QOL: quality of life; BMI: body mass index; HerQLes: hernia-related quality of life; ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists; SSO: surgical site occurence; SSI: surgical site infection; LOS: length of stay; RCT: randomized controlled trial.
ISSN:2000-656X
2000-6764
DOI:10.1080/2000656X.2020.1815754