Simple and safe technique for closure of midline abdominal wound dehiscence

Risk Factors for Dehiscence of Operative Incisions in Newborns after Laparotomy

BACKGROUND

 Surgical wound dehiscence (SWD) in neonates is a life-threatening complication. The aim was to define risk factors of postoperative incision dehiscence in this population.

METHODS

 Data of 144 patients from 2010 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. All full-term newborns or preterm newborns up to 42 weeks of amenorrhea (adjusted) who had a laparotomy within 30 days were included. Descriptive patient information and perioperative data were collected. SWD was defined as any separation of cutaneous edges of postoperative wounds.

RESULTS

 Overall, SWD occurred in 16/144 (11%) patients, with a significantly increased incidence in preterm newborns (13/59, 22%) compared with full-term newborns (3/85, 4%; p < 0.001). SWD was significantly associated with exposure to postnatal steroids (60% vs. 4%, p < 0.001) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (25% vs. 4%, p < 0.01), invasive ventilation duration before surgery (median at 10 vs. 0 days, p < 0.001), preoperative low hemoglobin concentration (115 vs. 147 g/L, p < 0.001) and platelet counts (127 vs. 295 G/L, p < 0.001), nonabsorbable suture material (43% vs. 8%, p < 0.001), the presence of ostomies (69% vs. 18%, p < 0.001), positive bacteriological wound cultures (50% vs. 6%, p < 0.001), and relaparotomy (25% vs. 3%, p < 0.01). Thirteen of 16 patients with SWD presented necrotizing enterocolitis/intestinal perforations (81%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

 This study identified prematurity and a number of other factors linked to the child's general condition as risk factors for SWD. Some of these can help physicians recognize and respond to at-risk patients and provide better counseling for parents.

Treatment of Superficial Incision Dehiscence after Abdominal Surgery by Z-Plasty: A Retrospective Case Series

OBJECTIVE

To explore the treatment of superficial incision dehiscence after abdominal surgery by Z-plasty combined with negative-pressure wound therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on seven patients with superficial abdominal incision dehiscence from October 2018 to February 2019. All patients were given systemic antibiotics and nutrition support. During the first stage, surgical debridement with negative-pressure wound therapy was performed. Local Z-plasty was performed in the second stage.

RESULTS

The incision healed well in all patients, and no infection or necrosis occurred in the flaps. During the follow-up of 7.3 months (range, 5-10 months), no incision rupture or redehiscence occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical debridement, negative-pressure wound therapy, and Z-plasty can be used to treat superficial abdominal incision dehiscence and achieve good therapeutic effect and prognosis. Z-plasty can be used as an alternative to direct suture of incisions because of its simplicity and excellent results.

Management of abdominal wound dehiscence: update of the literature and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We aimed to provide a contemporary overview of management strategies for AWD.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and a clinical trials registry were searched from 2009 onwards using the key words "abdominal wound dehiscence", "fascial dehiscence" and "burst abdomen". Study outcomes included surgical site infection (SSI), recurrence, incisional hernia and 30-day mortality. Studies reported by the EHS clinical guidelines on AWD were included and compared with. OpenMetaAnalyst was used for meta-analysis to calculate statistical significance and odds ratios (OR).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included reporting on a total of 632 patients: 16 retrospective studies, one early terminated randomized controlled trial, one review and the European Hernia Society guidelines. Nine studies reported use of synthetic mesh (n = 241), two of which used vacuum-assisted mesh-mediated fascial traction (VAWCM) (n = 19), six without VAWCM (n = 198) and one used synthetic mesh with both VAWCM (n = 6) and without VAWCM (n = 18); two used biological mesh (n = 19). Seven studies reported primary suture closure (n = 299). Three studies reported on an alternative method (n = 91). Follow-up ranged between 1 and 96 months. Meta-analysis was performed to compare the primary suture group with the synthetic mesh group. Heterogeneity was low to moderate depending on outcome. The overall SSI rate in the primary suture group was 27.6% versus 27.9% in the synthetic mesh group, resulting in mesh explantation in five patients; OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.23-1.81). Incisional hernia rates were 11.1% in the synthetic mesh group (19/171) and 30.7% in the primary suture group (67/218); OR 4.01 (95% CI 1.70-9.46). Recurrence rate did not show a statistically significant difference at 2.7% in the synthetic mesh group (3/112), compared to 10.2% in the primary suture group (21/206); OR 1.81 (95% CI 0.18-17.80). Mortality rates varied between 11.2% and 16.7% for primary suture group versus synthetic mesh; OR 1.85 (95% CI 0.91-3.76).

CONCLUSION

Included studies were of low to very low quality. The use of synthetic mesh results in a significantly lower rate of incisional hernia, whereas SSI rate was comparable to primary suture repair.