Effectiveness of triclosan-coated PDS Plus versus uncoated PDS II sutures for prevention of surgical site infection after abdominal wall closure: the randomised controlled PROUD trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative surgical site infections are one of the most frequent complications after open abdominal surgery, and triclosan-coated sutures were developed to reduce their occurrence. The aim of the PROUD trial was to obtain reliable data for the effectiveness of triclosan-coated PDS Plus sutures for abdominal wall closure, compared with non-coated PDS II sutures, in the prevention of surgical site infections. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised controlled group-sequential superiority trial was done in 24 German hospitals. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who underwent elective midline abdominal laparotomy for any reason were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were impaired mental state, language problems, and participation in another intervention trial that interfered with the intervention or outcome of this trial. A central web-based randomisation tool was used to randomly assign eligible participants by permuted block randomisation with a 1:1 allocation ratio and block size 4 before mass closure to either triclosan-coated sutures (PDS Plus) or uncoated sutures (PDS II) for abdominal fascia closure. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of superficial or deep surgical site infection according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria within 30 days after the operation. Patients, surgeons, and the outcome assessors were masked to group assignment. Interim and final analyses were by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with the German Clinical Trials Register, number DRKS00000390. FINDINGS: Between April 7, 2010, and Oct 19, 2012, 1224 patients were randomly assigned to intervention groups (607 to PDS Plus, and 617 to PDS II), of whom 1185 (587 PDS Plus and 598 PDS II) were analysed by intention to treat. The study groups were well balanced in terms of patient and procedure characteristics. The occurrence of surgical site infections did not differ between the PDS Plus group (87 [14·8%] of 587) and the PDS II group (96 [16·1%] of 598; OR 0·91, 95% CI 0·66-1·25; p=0·64). Serious adverse events also did not differ between the groups-146 of 583 (25·0%) patients treated with PDS Plus had at least one serious adverse event, compared with 138 of 602 (22·9%) patients treated with PDS II; p=0·39). INTERPRETATION: Triclosan-coated PDS Plus did not reduce the occurrence of surgical site infection after elective midline laparotomy. Innovative, multifactorial strategies need to be developed and assessed in future trials to reduce surgical site infections. FUNDING: Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited.

HAnd Suture Versus STApling for Closure of Loop Ileostomy (HASTA Trial): results of a multicenter randomized trial (DRKS00000040).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the HASTA trial was to compare hand suture versus stapling loop ileostomy closure in a randomized controlled trial. BACKGROUND: Bowel obstruction is one of the main and the clinically and economically most relevant complication following closure of loop ileostomy after low anterior resection. The best surgical technique for closure of loop ileostomy has not been defined yet. METHODS: HASTA trial is a multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled surgical trial with 2 parallel groups to compare hand suture versus stapling for closure of loop ileostomy. The primary endpoint was the rate of bowel obstruction within 30 days after ileostomy closure. RESULTS: A total of 337 randomized patients undergoing closure of loop ileostomy after low anterior resection because of rectal cancer in 27 centers were included. The overall rate of postoperative ileus after ileostomy closure was 13.4%. Seventeen of 165 (10.3%) patients in the stapler group and 27 of 163 (16.6%) in the hand suture group developed bowel obstruction within 30 days postoperatively [odds ratio (OR) = 1.72; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-3.31 = 0.10]. Duration of surgical intervention was significantly shorter in the stapler group (15 minutes; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis of potential risk factors did not reveal any significant correlation with development of postoperative ileus. Rate of anastomotic leakage (stapler: 3.0%, hand suture: 1.8%, P = 0.48) did not differ significantly as well as all other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Hand-sewn anastomosis versus stapler ileo-ileostomy for ileostomy closure are equally effective in terms of postoperative bowel obstruction, with stapler anastomosis leading to a shorter operation time. Postoperative ileus after ileostomy reversal remains a relevant complication.