An international assessment of surgeon practices in abdominal wound closure and surgical site infection prevention by the European Society for Coloproctology.

AIM: The burden of abdominal wound failure can be profound. Recent clinical guidelines have highlighted the heterogeneity of laparotomy closure techniques. The aim of this study was to investigate current midline closure techniques and practices for prevention of surgical site infection (SSI). METHOD: An online survey was distributed in 2021 among the membership of the European Society of Coloproctology and its partner societies. Surgeons were asked to provide information on how they would close the abdominal wall in three specific clinical scenarios and on SSI prevention practices. RESULTS: A total of 561 consultants and trainee surgeons participated in the survey, mainly from Europe (n = 375, 66.8%). Of these, 60.6% identified themselves as colorectal surgeons and 39.4% as general surgeons. The majority used polydioxanone for fascial closure, with small bite techniques predominating in clean-contaminated cases (74.5%, n = 418). No significant differences were found between consultants and trainee surgeons. For SSI prevention, more surgeons preferred the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) alone over MBP and oral antibiotics combined. Most surgeons preferred 2% alcoholic chlorhexidine (68.4%) or aqueous povidone-iodine (61.1%) for skin preparation. The majority did not use triclosan-coated sutures (73.3%) or preoperative warming of the wound site (78.5%), irrespective of level of training or European/non-European practice. CONCLUSION: Abdominal wound closure technique and SSI prevention strategies vary widely between surgeons. There is little evidence of a risk-stratified approach to wound closure materials or techniques, with most surgeons using the same strategy for all patient scenarios. Harmonization of practice and the limitation of outlying techniques might result in better outcomes for patients and provide a stable platform for the introduction and evaluation of further potential improvements.

Comparing outcomes between barbed and conventional sutures in patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty.

AIM: To compare outcomes between barbed sutures and conventional sutures among patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty. MATERIALS & METHODS: Retrospective study of patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing elective knee/hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis between 1 January 2013 and 1 September 2015. Patients were classified as: any Stratafix™ Knotless Tissue Control Devices (barbed suture group) used for closure vs. conventional sutures only (conventional suture group). RESULTS: Compared with the conventional suture group, the barbed suture group had statistically significant: shorter length of stay, knee = 0.2 d; hip = 0.3 d and operating room time, knee = 7 min; hip = 22 min and lower rate of discharge to skilled nursing facility/nonhome setting (knee = 3.0%; hip = 6.8%). CONCLUSION: Use of barbed sutures was associated with shorter length of stay, operating room time and less resource intensive discharge status as compared with conventional sutures alone.

Economic and clinical comparison of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate/polymer mesh tape with skin staples in total knee replacement.

OBJECTIVE: To compare economic and clinical outcomes between skin staples and 2-octyl cyanoacrylate plus polymer mesh tape, Dermabond Prineo skin closure system, (SCS) among patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). METHOD: Retrospective, observational study using the Premier Healthcare Database, which comprises hospital administrative and billing data for over 700 hospitals in the US. Patients selected for study had an elective hospital admission, with discharge occurring between January 2012 and September 2015, carrying primary ICD-9-CM procedure and diagnosis codes for TKR and osteoarthritis. Patients were classified into two mutually-exclusive groups based on billing records during the index admission: those with billing record(s) for the skin closure system (SCS group); and those with billing record(s) for skin staples (staple group). Primary outcomes were index admission's length of stay (LOS), total hospital costs, and discharge status (skilled nursing facility (SNF)/other versus home/home health-care); exploratory outcomes included operating room time (ORT) during index admission and 30, 60, and 90-day readmissions. The SCS and staple groups were propensity score matched (1:1/nearest neighbour/caliper=0.10) on patient, hospital, and provider characteristics. Multivariable regressions accounting for hospital-level clustering after matching were used to compare outcomes between study groups. RESULTS: Each group comprised 971 patients (1942 total patients; mean age: 65.3 years; female: 63.5%). The groups were generally well-balanced on matching covariates: mean standardised difference calculated across 49 covariates=0.049. Compared with the staple group, the SCS group had statistically significant shorter LOS (2.8 days versus 3.2 days, p=0.002), lower rate of discharge to SNF/other versus home/home health-care (26.4% versus 38.5%, p=0.011), and lower rate of 30, 60, and 90-day readmissions (30-day, 1.8% versus 4.4%, p=0.006; 60-day, 3.0% versus 5.4%, p<0.001; 90-day, 5.4% versus 7.4%, p=0.016). Differences between the groups for other outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing TKR, use of the SCS was associated with shorter LOS, less resource intensive discharge status, and lower rates of all-cause readmission as compared with skin staples.

The Impact of Surgical Approach on Late Recurrence in Incisional Hernia Repair.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We conducted a retrospective, observational study to compare real-world recurrence rates for different surgical approaches after incisional hernia mesh repair. METHODS: Two large US insurance claims databases, Truven Commercial Claims (CCAE) and Medicare Supplemental (MDCR), were evaluated for the period from 2009 to 2015. The first incisional hernia repair with mesh for patients 21 years or older was identified (INDEX). One-year continuous enrollment before INDEX was required. Mesh and approach (OPEN, laparoscopic [LAP], and conversion [CONV]) were identified with the use of CPT-4/ICD-9 codes. Recurrence was defined as a second incisional hernia repair 31 days or longer after INDEX. Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates and Cox models were used to analyze the effect of approach on recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 68,560 patients were identified for CCAE (78.7%) and MDCR (21.3%) with a mean (SD) age of 55.3 (12.8) years. The majority of procedures were OPEN (80.1%) followed by LAP (16.3%) and CONV (3.6%). OPEN had fewer female patients 53.7% compared with LAP (62.1%) and CONV (62.2%). CONV represented more inpatient (51.9%) procedures compared with LAP (41.0%) and OPEN (27.3%). Starting at 2 years post-INDEX, LAP (5.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5%-5.6%) had lower KM estimates compared with OPEN (5.9%, 95% CI 5.7%-6.2%]); after 3 years, LAP (6.8%, 95% CI 6.2%-7.5%]) had lower estimates than both OPEN (7.9%, 95% CI 7.6%-8.3%) and CONV (9.3%, 95% CI 7.6%-11.0%). After controlling for confounders, the risk was lower for LAP compared with OPEN (hazard ratio 0.839, 95% CI 0.752-0.936) and CONV (hazard ratio 0.808, 95% CI 0.746-0.875), while OPEN and CONV were not significantly different from each other. CONCLUSION: Successful laparoscopic surgery incisional hernia mesh repair was associated with decreased risk of recurrence compared with OPEN and CONV.

Real-world Bleeding Outcomes and Costs Following Vascular Graft Anastomosis Using PROLENE Sutures with HEMO-SEAL Technology in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

Background: Suture hole bleeding is a common complication of vascular graft anastomosis that has potential to prolong vascular procedures, increase costs, and compromise patient outcomes. Objectives: Compare real-world bleeding-related outcomes and costs following vascular anastomosis using PROLENE sutures with HEMO-SEAL technology (HEMO-SEAL sutures) compared with standard PROLENE sutures in patients receiving abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in the United States. Methods: AAA repair procedures using hemostats and either HEMO-SEAL sutures or standard PROLENE sutures were identified from 2009 to 2013 using the Premier Healthcare Database. The primary outcome was the number and cost of hemostat units. Secondary outcomes were number and cost of sutures, bleeding complications, and transfusions. Results: A total of 5082 discharges for AAA repairs using hemostats and HEMO-SEAL sutures or standard PROLENE sutures were identified. HEMO-SEAL sutures were used in 79 (1.6%) discharges, standard PROLENE sutures were used in 4946 (97.3%); both sutures (excluded from the analysis) were used in 57 (1.1%). Discharge demographics were similar across suture groups, with the exception of disease severity; the HEMO-SEAL suture group had a higher proportion of minor discharges and a lower proportion of extreme discharges compared with the standard PROLENE suture group. Mean number of hemostat units used per discharge (2.34 vs 3.30; median = 2.0 in both groups; p=0.026) and median hemostat costs per discharge ($111 vs $186; p<0.01) were significantly lower in the HEMO-SEAL suture group compared with the standard PROLENE suture group. Fewer sutures per discharge (p<0.0001), lower mean costs of sutures per discharge, higher median costs of sutures per discharge (p=0.0045), and fewer transfusions (0.0019) were also seen in the HEMO-SEAL suture group compared with the standard PROLENE suture group. No statistically significant difference in bleeding complications was observed between suture groups. Conclusion: The results indicate that real-world use of HEMO-SEAL sutures may be associated with reduced hemostat usage and costs, and reduced bleeding that requires additional hemostats and/or transfusions.

A High-Strength, Absorbable, Antibacterial Knotless Tissue Control Device for Fascial Closure.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides an overview of the STRATAFIX™ SYMMETRIC PDS™ Plus Knotless Tissue Control Device design and performance characteristics and highlights the device's relevance for use in gynecological procedures. Various device testing was conducted on tensile strength, fixation tab mass comparison to conventional suture knot tower, initiation stitch strength, and wound holding strength to highlight the STRATAFIX™ SYMMETRIC PDS™ Plus Device's key product attributes that may benefit general and minimally invasive gynecological procedures. RECENT FINDINGS: This article serves as a technological assessment of the latest barbed suture offered by Ethicon-STRATAFIX™ SYMMETRIC PDS™ Plus Knotless Tissue Control Device. This device is indicated for soft tissue approximation and can be used to close high tension areas, such as fascia. SUMMARY: Barbed sutures were successfully introduced to gynecologic surgery many years ago, and their safety and effectiveness have been demonstrated in a variety of gynecological surgical procedures. By eliminating the need to tie surgical knots, barbed suture provides a few key advantages over conventional suture, such as reducing operating room time, eliminating potential knot-related complications, and reducing suturing difficulty in open and minimally invasive gynecological procedures. Additionally, there are tensile strength and wound holding strength advantages (vs. conventional PDS™ Plus Suture) described in the product testing highlighted in this review that may be relevant for gynecological procedures.