Feasibility and Safety of Absorbable Knotless Wound Closure Device in Laparoscopic Myomectomy

Barbed versus conventional sutures for cesarean uterine scar defects: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The role of barbed sutures in preventing myometrial defects and enhancing postpartum outcomes after cesarean section is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared clinical and ultrasonographic outcomes of uterine scar defects after C-section with barbed and conventional smooth thread sutures.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multicenter, parallel-group, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Four obstetrics and gynecology departments across three Japanese healthcare regions were included. The participants were women requiring their first cesarean delivery between May 2020 and March 2023. Of the 1211 participants enrolled, 298 underwent cesarean section and 253 were followed-up until July 2023. Participants with singleton pregnancies were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either conventional or spiral thread sutures with a double-layer continuous suture. The study period comprised the time of consent to the 6- to 7-month examination. The primary endpoint was the rate of scar niches >2 mm evaluated using transvaginal ultrasonography at 6 to 7 months after surgery. Additional metrics included the total operative time, suture application time, operative blood loss, number of additional sutures required for hemostasis, maternal surgical complications, postoperative infections, surgeon's years of experience, and individual subscale scores.

RESULTS

All data of the 220 participants (barbed suture group: 110; conventional suture group: 110) were available, thus enabling a full analysis set. A comparison of the barbed and conventional suture groups, respectively, revealed the following: niche length, 2.45±1.65 mm (range: 1.0-6.7) versus 3.79±1.84 mm (range: 1.0-11.0) (P<0.001); niche depth, 1.78±1.07 mm (range: 1.0-5.7) versus 2.70±1.34 mm (range: 1.0-7.3) (P<0.001); residual myometrial thickness, 8.46±1.74 mm (range: 4.8-13.0) versus 7.07±2.186 mm (range: 2.2-16.2) (P<0.001); and niche width, 1.58±2.73 mm (range: 0.0-14.0) versus 2.88±2.36 mm (range: 0.0-11.0) (P<0.001), respectively. The barbed suture group exhibited no defects and a residual myometrial thickness <3 mm. Furthermore, the barbed suture group had a lower rate of uterine niches (29.1%; n=32/110) than the conventional suture group (68.2%; n=75/110). Secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in operative times, maternal surgical complications, or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Double-layer barbed sutures during cesarean delivery may prevent cesarean section scar defects and postoperative complications.

Comparison of efficacy of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic treatment for uterine leiomyoma: a latest meta-analysis

Objective

Single-port laparoscopy has been proposed as an ideal surgical method for the treatment of uterine leiomyoma. It can effectively remove the lesion, reduce the loss of hemoglobin, and has superior cosmetic effects. Therefore, we searched relevant studies and conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of single-port laparoscopy on myoma resection, hemoglobin loss, and scar beauty compared to conventional laparoscopy.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, scope, Cochrane, CNKI, and other databases to find randomized controlled studies on the efficacy of single-port laparoscopy and traditional laparoscopy for meta-analysis. The main outcomes of our study were the duration of surgery, the reduction of hemoglobin, and the cosmetic effect of the postoperative scar. The effect model was selected according to heterogeneity (random effect model or fixed effect model), and the relevant sensitivity analysis and publication bias test were performed.

Results

We searched a total of 501 related literature articles and finally included 19 studies involving 21 researchers. Comparison of single-port laparoscopic myomectomy with traditional surgery: Operation time had no significant difference (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD]: 0.13, 95% Confidence interval (CI), -0.04 to 0.30; I²=74%; P = 0.14); The reduction of hemoglobin is lower ([SMD]: -0.04; 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.14; I²=71%; P = 0.65), and the cosmetic effect of postoperative scar is more satisfactory ([SMD]: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.83; I²=72%, P= 0.04). There was no significant difference in conversion rate, postoperative pain, blood loss, postoperative gastrointestinal recovery time, or length of hospital stay.

Conclusion

Compared with traditional laparoscopy, the operation time of the treatment of uterine leiomyoma by single-port laparoscopy is not extended, the reduction of hemoglobin is less, and the cosmetic effect of the scar is better. Therefore, single-port laparoscopy is superior to traditional surgery in the treatment of uterine leiomyoma.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2023-3-0071/, identifier INPLASY202330071.

An analysis of the surgical outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy and multi-port laparoscopic myomectomy

Background

This study sought to compare the surgical results of patients undergoing a laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy (LESS-M) and a conventional laparoscopic myomectomy (CLM) at our hospital.

Methods

The basic data of 233 patients undergoing LESS-M and 233 patients undergoing CLM at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University were collected from January 2018 to January 2020, and the results of the operations were compared by evaluating a number of factors, including operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative fever, and postoperative maximum body temperature.

Results

The operation times of the LESS-M and CLM groups were 83.9±33.4 and 75.2±26.7 min, respectively; the difference between the groups was statistically significant. The surgical blood loss of the LESS-M group was 86.1±76.9 mL, and that of the CLM group was 83.8±79.9 mL (P>0.05). When the diameter of a fibroid was ≥8 cm, a fibroid was located in the posterior wall or the number of fibroids was ≥4, the operation time of the CLM group was shorter than that of the LESS-M group. When the diameter of a fibroid was ≥8 cm, the blood loss of the CLM group was less than that of the LESS-M group.

Conclusions

LESS-M is safe and feasible. If the diameter of a fibroid is ≥8 cm, the fibroid is located in the posterior wall, or the number of fibroids is ≥4, the utility of single-port surgery should be carefully considered.

A randomized clinical trial of knotless barbed suture vs conventional suture for closure of the uterine incision at cesarean delivery

BACKGROUND

Knotless barbed sutures are monofilament sutures with barbs cut into them. These sutures self-anchor, maintaining tissue approximation without the need for surgical knots.

OBJECTIVE

The hypothesis of this study was that knotless barbed suture could be used on the myometrium to close the hysterotomy at cesarean delivery. The objective was to compare uterine closure time, need for additional sutures, and blood loss between this and a conventional suture.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective, unblinded, randomized controlled trial conducted at the Ziv Medical Center, Zefat, Israel. The primary outcome was the length of time needed to close the uterine incision, which was measured from the start of the first suture on the uterus until obtaining uterine hemostasis. To minimize provider bias, women were randomized by sealed envelopes that were opened in the operating room just prior to uterine closure with either a bidirectional knotless barbed suture or conventional suture. Secondary outcomes included the number of additional hemostatic sutures needed and blood loss during incision closure.

RESULTS

Patients were enrolled from August 2016 until March 2017. One hundred two women were randomized. Fifty-one had uterine closure with knotless barbed suture and 51 with conventional suture. The groups were similar for demographics as well as number of previous cesarean deliveries. Uterine closure time using the knotless barbed suture was significantly shorter than the conventional suture by a mean of 1 minute 43 seconds (P < .001, 95% confidence interval, 67.69-138.47 seconds). Knotless barbed sutures were associated with a lower need for hemostatic sutures (median 0 vs 1, P < .001), and blood loss measured during incision closure was significantly lower (mean 221 mL vs 268 mL, P < .005).

CONCLUSION

The use of a knotless barbed suture is a reasonable alternative to conventional sutures because it reduced the closure time of the uterine incision. There was also less need for additional hemostatic sutures and slightly reduced estimated blood loss.