Subcuticular Sutures Versus Staples for Wound Closure in Open Liver Resection: A Randomised Clinical Trial

Association between skin suture devices and incidence of incisional surgical site infection after gastrointestinal surgery: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common complications after abdominal surgery.

AIM

To compare which suture devices could reduce the incidence of incisional surgical site infections (SSIs) after gastrointestinal surgery using a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

The CENTRAL, PubMed, and ICHUSHI-Web databases were searched from January 1st, 2000, to December 31st, 2022, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the incidence of incisional SSI after gastrointestinal surgery among patients treated with different surgical suture devices, including non-absorbable sutures, absorbable sutures, skin staplers, and tissue adhesives (last searched in August 23th, 2023). The risk of bias was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. To estimate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) for each comparison, a fixed-effect inverse-variance model based on the Mantel-Haenszel approach was employed.

FINDINGS

A total of 18 RCTs with 5496 patients were included in this study. The overall SSIs in absorbable sutures were significantly lower than those in skin staplers (OR: 0.77; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.63-0.95) and non-absorbable sutures (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-0.99), whereas SSIs in absorbable sutures were not significantly different from the SSIs in tissue adhesive. The highest P-score was 0.91 for absorbable sutures. A funnel plot for estimating the heterogeneity of the studies revealed that a publication bias would be minimal (Egger test, P = 0.271).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that absorbable sutures reduced incisional SSIs in gastrointestinal surgical operations compared to any other suture devices.

Superiority trial for the development of an ideal method for the closure of midline abdominal wall incisions to reduce the incidence of wound complications after elective gastroenterological surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The recent guidelines from the European and American Hernia Societies recommend a continuous small-bite suturing technique with slowly absorbable sutures for fascial closure of midline abdominal wall incisions to reduce the incidence of wound complications, especially for incisional hernia. However, this is based on low-certainty evidence. We could not find any recommendations for skin closure. The wound closure technique is an important determinant of the risk of wound complications, and a comprehensive approach to prevent wound complications should be developed.

METHODS

We propose a single-institute, prospective, randomized, blinded-endpoint trial to assess the superiority of the combination of continuous suturing of the fascia without peritoneal closure and continuous suturing of the subcuticular tissue (study group) over that of interrupted suturing of the fascia together with the peritoneum and interrupted suturing of the subcuticular tissue (control group) for reducing the incidence of midline abdominal wall incision wound complications after elective gastroenterological surgery with a clean-contaminated wound. Permuted-block randomization with an allocation ratio of 1:1 and blocking will be used. We hypothesize that the study group will show a 50% reduction in the incidence of wound complications. The target number of cases is set at 284. The primary outcome is the incidence of wound complications, including incisional surgical site infection, hemorrhage, seroma, wound dehiscence within 30 days after surgery, and incisional hernia at approximately 1 year after surgery.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide initial evidence on the ideal combination of fascial and skin closure for midline abdominal wall incision to reduce the incidence of overall postoperative wound complications after gastroenterological surgery with a clean-contaminated wound. This trial is expected to generate high-quality evidence that supports the current guidelines for the closure of abdominal wall incisions from the European and American Hernia Societies and to contribute to their next updates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR UMIN000048442. Registered on 1 August 2022. https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000055205.

Subcuticular suture and incisional surgical-site infection in elective hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: an open-label, pragmatic randomized clinical trial (CLOSKIN trial)

BACKGROUND

Subcuticular suture has proven to reduce superficial incisional SSI (si-SSI) in clean surgery. However, question remains regarding clean-contaminated procedures. The aim of this study is to assess if subcuticular suture is superior to staples in reducing si-SSI incidence in elective HBP surgery.

METHODS

Single-centre, open-label, parallel, pragmatic randomized clinical trial conducted at a referral tertiary Hospital between January 2020 and April 2022. Patients eligible for elective HBP surgery were randomly assigned (1:1) to subcuticular suture or surgical staples wound closure using a minimisation method based on previously confirmed risk factors. The primary endpoint was the incidence of si-SSI. Considered secondary endpoints were major postoperative morbidity in both groups, additional wound complications, median hospital length of stay and need for re-hospitalisation.

RESULTS

Of the 379 patients, 346 patients were randomly assigned to receive skin closure with staples (n = 173) or subcuticular suture (n = 173). After further exclusion of 11 participants, 167 and 168 patients, respectively in the control and the experimental group received their allocated intervention. For the primary endpoint, no significant differences in si-SSI rate were found: 17 (9.82%) staples group vs. 8 (4.62%) in subcuticular suture group (p = 0.062). Subset analysis confirmed absence of significant differences. As for secondary endpoints, overall wound complications did not differ significantly between two procedures: 19 (10.98%) vs. 10 (6.35%) (p = 0.127). There were no treatment related adverse events. However, occurrence of si-SSI contributed to major postoperative morbidity in both groups (p < 0.001 and p = 0.018) and to a substantially prolonged postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Subcuticular suture might offer a relative benefit for skin closure reducing incidence of si-SSI after elective HBP surgery, although this was found not to be clinically relevant. Yet, this should not be interpreted as equivalence among both treatments. Therefore, wound closure strategy should not be based only on these grounds.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN Registry number ISRCTN37315612 (registration date: 14/01/2020).

Advantages of skin closure with subcuticular suture for liver resection on postoperative and cosmetic outcomes: a propensity matched analysis

PURPOSE

The effects of subcuticular sutures on postoperative and cosmetic outcomes in patients who underwent liver resection have not been well studied. Here, we investigated the advantages of subcuticular suture compared to skin stapler regarding open liver resection.

METHODS

We assessed 342 patients who underwent liver resection at Nara Medical University between 2008 and 2015. They were divided into two groups: subcuticular suture and staple groups. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were retrospectively compared using one-to-one propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

In this period, 179 patients underwent skin closure with subcuticular sutures and 163 patients underwent skin closure with staples. After propensity matching, 85 pairs of cases were matched. The incidence of wound infection was similar in the two groups (3.5% in the subcuticular suture group and 9.4% in the staple group; p = 0.119). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the subcuticular suture group than in the staple group (10 days vs 15 days; p < 0.001). In addition, the rate of patients who were discharged within 7 days after surgery was statistically higher in the subcuticular group (21.1% vs 3.5%, p = 0.001). Hypertrophic scar 6 months after surgery was significantly less frequent in the subcuticular group (9.4% vs 25.9%, p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

Subcuticular sutures might be advantageous for liver surgery reducing length of hospital stay and proportion of hypertrophic scar.

Subcuticular Sutures versus Staples in Reducing Surgical Site Infections after Open Abdominal Digestive Surgery: A System Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Wound complications, primarily surgical site infections (SSIs), impose heavy a heavy burden on public health. This study aimed to compare the difference in the abilities of subcuticular sutures and staples to prevent SSIs after open abdominal surgery on the digestive system. Methods: A comprehensive search in Ovid-MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials) was performed in January 2021. This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The PICOS (population, intervention, control, outcome, study type) model was applied to guide study selection and data extraction. Results: Six studies including 3,863 participants were included. According to analysis of SSI incidence, there was no obvious difference between the incidence of SSI when subcuticular sutures and staples were used (odds ratio [OR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.08; p = 0.15). In the subsequent subgroup analysis of different operation procedures, the pooled results also failed to show significance for upper gastrointestinal surgery (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.63-1.9; p = 0.75), lower gastrointestinal surgery (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.05; p = 0.1), or hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery (pooled OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.34-1.54; p = 0.4). Conclusions: Subcuticular sutures and staples did not show differences in their ability to prevent SSI incidence after open abdominal operation. These results require further verification by large-scale, high-quality randomized controlled trials.