Abdominal incisions from creation to closure

When is the right time to remove staples after an elective cesarean delivery?: a randomized control trial

Objective: To determine if there are differences in scar healing and cosmetic outcome between early and late metal staples removal after cesarean delivery.Study design: Randomized controlled trial, in which patients undergoing a scheduled nonemergent cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to early staples removal versus late staples removal. Outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Scars were evaluated 8 weeks after cesarean delivery. Primary outcome measures were Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) scores. Secondary outcome measures included surgical site infection, wound disruption, hematoma, or seroma.Results: During the study period, 104 patients were randomized. There were no between-group differences in maternal demographics. Both groups had similar indications for cesarean delivery and similar rate of previous one or more cesarean delivery. Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale were similar for patients (p = .932) and for physician observer (p = .529). No significant differences were demonstrated between the groups in the rate of surgical site infection or wound disruption.Conclusions: Removal of stainless steel staples on postoperative 4 versus postoperative 8 after cesarean delivery showed similar outcome without significant effect on incision healing. Therefore, timing of removal staples after cesarean delivery could be performed based on patients and surgeon preference.

Healing comparison of porcine cutaneous incisions made with cold steel scalpel, standard electrosurgical blade, and a novel tissue dissector

Background:

Standard electrosurgery provides superior hemostasis compared to a cold steel scalpel, but inferior tissue healing. A novel electrosurgical blade with an advanced waveform, the MEGADYNE ACE BLADE™ 700 Soft Tissue Dissector (ACE), was designed to provide both excellent hemostasis and wound healing. This study compared ACE to scalpel and standard electrosurgery in a porcine model of wound healing.

Methods:

Skin incisions from six pigs were evaluated at time points of 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 weeks after application of the three devices. Histopathology was performed on samples from each time point. For each non-initial time point, the healing incisions were photographed for later evaluation by expert graders, and excised for wound strength testing.

Results:

Time 0 photomicrographs showed a gradient of thermal tissue damage by initial incision, ranging from no damage made by the scalpel, minimal damage made by ACE, and twice the ACE damage made by a nonstick PTFE-coated electrosurgical blade. Histopathologic analysis at 6 weeks showed comparable dermal scar width measurements for scalpel and ACE incisions. Scars were wider for incisions made by standard electrosurgical blade. Wound strength was greater for scalpel and ACE than for standard electrosurgery. Cosmetic results at 6 weeks were not significantly different between scalpel and ACE incisions, while standard electrosurgical blade incisions were significantly inferior to ACE (odds ratio: 53.4, p<0.001).

Conclusion:

The MEGADYNE ACE BLADE™ 700 Soft Tissue Dissector represents a significant improvement in electrosurgical technology for skin incisions and dispels the traditional concerns of delayed healing and poor cosmetic result that have been attributed to using conventional electrosurgical blades for skin incisions.

Subcutaneous closure versus no subcutaneous closure after non-caesarean surgical procedures

BACKGROUND

Most surgical procedures involve a cut in the skin that allows the surgeon to gain access to the surgical site. Most surgical wounds are closed fully at the end of the procedure, and this review focuses on these. The human body has multiple layers of tissues, and the skin is the outermost of these layers. The loose connective tissue just beneath the skin is called subcutaneous tissue, and this generally contains fat. There is uncertainty about closure of subcutaneous tissue after surgery: some surgeons advocate closure of subcutaneous tissue, as they consider this closes dead space and leads to a decrease in wound complications; others consider closure of subcutaneous tissue to be an unnecessary step that increases operating time and involves the use of additional suture material without offering any benefit.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits (such as decreased wound-related complications) and consequences (such as increased operating time) of subcutaneous closure compared with no subcutaneous closure in participants undergoing non-caesarean surgical procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

In August 2013 we searched the following databases: Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 29 August, 2013); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to August Week 3 2013); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations August 28, 2013); Ovid EMBASE (1974 to 2013 Week 34); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 23 August 2013). We did not restrict studies with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing subcutaneous closure with no subcutaneous closure irrespective of the nature of the suture material(s) or whether continuous or interrupted sutures were used. We included all RCTs in the analysis, regardless of language, publication status, publication year, or sample size.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for comparing binary (dichotomous) outcomes between the groups and calculated the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. We performed meta-analysis using the fixed-effect model and random-effects model. We performed intention-to-treat analysis whenever possible.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Six of the trials provided data for this review and all of these were at high risk of bias. Six trials randomised a total of 815 participants to subcutaneous closure (410 participants) or no subcutaneous closure (405 participants). Overall, 7.7% of participants (63/815 of participants) developed superficial surgical site infections and there was no clear evidence of a difference between the two intervention groups (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.33; very low quality evidence). Only two trials reported superficial wound dehiscence, with 7.9% (17/215) of participants developing the problem. It is not clear whether the lack of reporting of this outcome in other trials was because it did not occur, or was not measured. There was no clear evidence of a between-group difference in the proportion of participants who developed superficial wound dehiscence in the trials that reported this outcome (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.22 to 1.41; very low quality evidence). Only one trial reported deep wound dehiscence, which occurred in 8.3% (5/60) of participants. There was no clear evidence of a difference in the proportion of participants who developed deep wound dehiscence between the two groups (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.03 to 2.11; very low quality evidence). Three trials reported the length of hospital stay and found no significant difference between groups (MD 0.10 days; 95% CI -0.45 to 0.64; very low quality evidence). We do not know whether this review reveals a lack of effect or lack of evidence of effect. The confidence intervals for these outcomes were wide, and significant benefits or harms from subcutaneous closure cannot be ruled out. In addition, none of the trials assessed the impact of subcutaneous closure on quality of life, long-term patient outcomes (the follow-up period in the trials varied between one week and two months after surgery) or financial implications to the healthcare provider.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently evidence of very low quality which is insufficient to support or refute subcutaneous closure after non-caesarean operations. The use of subcutaneous closure has the potential to affect patient outcomes and utilisation of healthcare resources. Further well-designed trials at low risk of bias are necessary.

Myths and legends in orthopaedic practice: are we all guilty?

Over years of practice, many beliefs and practices become entrenched as tried and tested, and we subconsciously believe they are based on scientific evidence. We identified nine such beliefs by interviewing orthopaedic surgeons in which studies (or lack thereof) apparently do not support such practices. These are: changing the scalpel blade after the skin incision to limit contamination; bending the patient's knee when applying a thigh tourniquet; bed rest for treatment of deep vein thrombosis; antibiotics in irrigation solution; routine use of hip precautions; routine use of antibiotics for the duration of wound drains; routine removal of hardware in children; correlation between operative time and infection; and not changing dressings on the floor before scrubbing. A survey of 186 practicing orthopaedic surgeons in academic and community settings was performed to assess their routine practice patterns. We present the results of the survey along with an in-depth literature review of these topics. Most surgeon practices are based on a combination of knowledge gained during training, reading the literature, and personal experience. The results of this survey hopefully will raise the awareness of the selected literature for common practices.

Surgical exposure and anatomy of the female pelvis

Female pelvic anatomy encompasses the reproductive, urologic, and gastrointestinal systems. Knowledge of the inherent relations between these organ systems, as well as the ability to develop pelvic spaces, will enable the surgeon to approach pelvic pathology confidently. This article highlights basic anatomy of the female pelvis and emphasizes points of caution during pelvic surgery, as well as reviews the essential principles of pelvic support.

Prevalence of diastasis recti abdominis in a urogynecological patient population

A urogynecologist's examination typically includes assessment of the abdominal musculature, including the determination of whether a diastasis recti abdominis (DRA) is present. The purposes of the current study were to examine the (1) prevalence of DRA in a urogynecological population, (2) differences in select characteristics of patients with and without DRA, and (3) relationship of DRA to support-related pelvic floor dysfunction diagnoses. A retrospective chart review was conducted by an independent examiner. Fifty-two percent of the patients examined presented with DRA. Patients with DRA were older, reported higher gravity and parity, and had weaker pelvic floor muscles than patients without DRA. Sixty-six percent of all the patients with DRA had at least one support-related pelvic floor dysfunction (SPFD) diagnosis. There was a relationship between the presence of DRA and the SPFD diagnoses of stress urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, and pelvic organ prolapse.

Chirurgische Durchtrennung und Verschluss der Bauchdecke

Access to the abdominal cavity must be performed in such a way that surgical treatment procedures can be performed safely. For skin incision, scalpel and electrocautery are equivalent. Subcutaneous tissue and fascias must be divided by electrocautery to minimize blood loss. The best way to close the abdominal cavity is by an all layer, slowly absorbable, running suture with a suture: wound length ratio of at least 4:1. Closing the peritoneal layer is not necessary. Subcutaneous sutures and drains do not reduce the risk of wound complications. Staples should be used for closing the skin.

Subcutaneous Tissue Reapproximation, Alone or in Combination With Drain, in Obese Women Undergoing Cesarean Delivery

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of subcutaneous suture reapproximation alone with suture plus subcutaneous drain for the prevention of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter randomized trial of women undergoing cesarean delivery. Consenting women with 4 cm or more of subcutaneous thickness were randomized to either subcutaneous suture closure alone (n = 149) or suture plus drain (n = 131). The drain was attached to bulb suction and removed at 72 hours or earlier if output was less than 30 mL/24 h. The primary study outcome was a composite wound morbidity rate (defined by any of the following: subcutaneous tissue dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, abscess, or fascial dehiscence).

RESULTS

From April 2001 to July 2004, a total of 280 women were enrolled. Ninety-five percent of women (268/280) had a follow-up wound assessment. Both groups were similar with respect to age, race, parity, weight, cesarean indication, diabetes, steroid/antibiotic use, chorioamnionitis, and subcutaneous thickness. The composite wound morbidity rate was 17.4% (25/144) in the suture group and 22.7% (28/124) in the suture plus drain group (relative risk 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.8-2.1). Individual wound complication rates, including subcutaneous dehiscence (15.3% versus 21.8%), seroma (9.0% versus 10.6%), hematoma (2.2% versus 2.4%), abscess (0.7% versus 3.3%), fascial dehiscence (1.4% versus 1.7%), and hospital readmission for wound complications (3.5% versus 6.6%), were similar (P > .05) between women treated with suture alone and those treated with suture plus drain, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The additional use of a subcutaneous drain along with a standard subcutaneous suture reapproximation technique is not effective for the prevention of wound complications in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery.

Can thermal lasers promote skin wound healing?

Lasers are now widely used for treating numerous cutaneous lesions, for scar revision (hypertrophic and keloid scars), for tissue welding, and for skin resurfacing and remodeling (wrinkle removal). In these procedures lasers are used to generate heat. The modulation of the effect (volatilization, coagulation, hyperthermia) of the laser is obtained by using different wavelengths and laser parameters. The heat source obtained by conversion of light into heat can be very superficial, yet intense, if the laser light is well absorbed (far-infrared:CO(2) or Erbium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet [Er:YAG] lasers), or it can be much deeper and less intense if the laser light is less absorbed by the skin (visible or near-infrared). Lasers transfer energy, in the form of heat, to surrounding tissues and, regardless of the laser used, a 45-50 degrees C temperature gradient will be obtained in the surrounding skin. If a wound healing process exists, it is a result of live cells reacting to this low temperature increase. The generated supraphysiologic level of heat is able to induce a heat shock response (HSR), which can be defined as the temporary changes in cellular metabolism. These changes are rapid and transient, and are characterized by the production of a small family of proteins termed the heat shock proteins (HSP). Recent experimental studies have clearly demonstrated that HSP 70, which is over-expressed following laser irradiation, could play a role with a coordinated expression of other growth factors such as transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta. TGF-beta is known to be a key element in the inflammatory response and the fibrogenic process. In this process, the fibroblasts are the key cells since they produce collagen and extracellular matrix. In conclusion, the analysis of the literature, and the fundamental considerations concerning the healing process when using thermal lasers, are in favor of a modification of the growth factors synthesis after laser irradiation, induced by an HSR. An extensive review of the different techniques and several clinical studies confirm that thermal lasers could effectively promote skin wound healing, if they are used in a controlled manner.

Peritoneal adhesions: etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical significance. Recent advances in prevention and management

AIM

To summarize the most common etiologic factors and describe the pathophysiology in the formation of peritoneal adhesions, to outline their clinical significance and consequences, and to evaluate the pharmacologic, mechanical, and surgical adjuvant strategies to minimize peritoneal adhesion formation.

METHODS

We performed an extensive MEDLINE search of the internationally published English literature of all medical and epidemiological journal articles, textbooks, scientific reports, and scientific journals from 1940 to 1997. We also reviewed reference lists in all the articles retrieved in the search as well as those of major texts regarding intraperitoneal postsurgical adhesion formation. All sources identified were reviewed with particular attention to risk factors, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, various methods, and innovative techniques for effectively and safely reducing the formation of postsurgical adhesions.

RESULTS

The formation of postoperative peritoneal adhesions is an important complication following gynecological and general abdominal surgery, leading to clinical and significant economical consequences. Adhesion occur in more than 90% of the patients following major abdominal surgery and in 55-100% of the women undergoing pelvic surgery. Small-bowel obstruction, infertility, chronic abdominal and pelvic pain, and difficult reoperative surgery are the most common consequences of peritoneal adhesions. Despite elaborate efforts to develop effective strategies to reduce or prevent adhesions, their formation remains a frequent occurrence after abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Until additional information and findings from future clinical investigations exist, only a meticulous surgical technique can be advocated in order to reduce unnecessary morbidity and mortality rates from these untoward effects of surgery.

Techniques for performing caesarean section

In many countries caesarean section has become the mode of delivery in over a quarter of all births. Safety of the mother and cost are the two main areas of concern. Various studies on the techniques of performing a caesarean section have focused on reducing the operating time, blood loss, wound infection and cost. Given the fact that caesarean section is the most commonly performed operation in obstetrics, it is important that trainers and trainees are familiar with the basic surgical techniques and that best practice is followed. At the same time surgeons should take necessary precautions to reduce their risk of exposure to Hepatitis B and HIV. The skin incision and entry into abdominal cavity is best achieved by the modified Cohen's incision. The lower segment transverse uterine incision has stood the test of time over a period of 75 years and remains the best way to enter the uterus. Closure of the uterus in single layer appears to be acceptable, whenever technically possible. Placental delivery should be by controlled cord traction after spontaneous expulsion. Closure of the visceral and parietal layers of the peritoneum no longer seems to be necessary. Obliteration of space in the subcutaneous layer, either by suture or by suction, seems to reduce wound disruption. These issues are being considered in the CAESAR randomized controlled trial of surgical techniques currently underway in England.Prophylactic antibiotics are mandatory in preventing post-operative morbidity. Many of the above mentioned steps have been tested in randomized trials. Further studies are needed to examine a wide range of questions arising from this review, e.g. best position of the patient, the value of exteriorization of the uterus whilst repairing the uterus, and the use of agents to relax the uterus in difficult deliveries.

Modified Joel-Cohen technique for caesarean delivery

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether a series of changes in the current caesarean section operative routine, based on new knowledge, would be beneficial.

DESIGN

A prospective controlled trial.

SETTING

Labour ward with approximately 3000 deliveries annually in a suburban area of Gothenburg, Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventy-two pregnant women scheduled for delivery by caesarean section were randomised to either modified Joel-Cohen technique (n = 36) or Pfannenstiel technique (n = 36).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Blood loss during surgery and operating time.

RESULTS

The median estimated intra-operative blood loss was 250 mL in the modified Joel-Cohen group and 400 mL in the Pfannenstiel group (P = 0.026). The proportion of women with > or = 300 mL was 16/36 in the modified Joel-Cohen group vs 28/36 in the Pfannenstiel group (OR 0.229, 95% CI 0.082-0.637). Median operating time was 20 min in the modified Joel-Cohen group compared with 28 min in the Pfannenstiel group (P < 0.001). The proportion of women with > or = 25 min was 1/36 in the modified Joel-Cohen group vs 33/36 in the Pfannenstiel group (OR 0.003, 95% CI 0.000-0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the modified Joel-Cohen technique of caesarean delivery reduced intraoperative blood loss and operating time compared with the Pfannenstiel technique.