A cost-utility analysis of small bite sutures versus large bite sutures in the closure of midline laparotomies in the United Kingdom National Health Service

A Comparison of a Small-Stitch Closure With a Standard Closure in Midline Laparotomy Incisions: A Prospective Comparative Study

Introduction Midline incision provides a rapid and thorough approach to the abdominal cavity and, therefore, is widely employed in both emergency and elective procedures. However, midline laparotomy is associated with many post-operative complications like wound dehiscence, incisional hernia, fistula formation, and surgical site infection (SSI). The purpose of the study is to compare the complications that occurred post-operatively in association with the long and small bite suture techniques for midline laparotomy incisions. Methodology A prospective comparative study was carried out among 90 cases of midline laparotomies for 18 months (January 2021 to June 2022). The participants were categorized into two groups: (1) Group A, which included 45 patients, underwent small-suture abdominal fascia closure, and (2) Group B, which consisted of the remaining 45 patients, underwent large-suture abdominal midline wound closure. Patients were followed up in the hospital till the day of discharge and in the outpatient department (visit 1, within one month of surgery) for pain, wound dehiscence, and surgical site infection. Patients were called for visit 2 (six months post-surgery) and incisional hernia rates were assessed. Results On the numerical pain rating scale, the mean score was higher in Group B, that is, 4.1 than in Group A, which was 3.5. Wound dehiscence and incisional hernia rates were higher among Group B cases. The majority of SSIs were noted in Group B with statistically significant results. Conclusion Despite the lack of randomization, the results demonstrated in this study support the use of small bite sutures in comparison to long bite sutures for laparotomy closure.

The Best Closure Technique Without Mesh in Elective Midline Laparotomy Closure

Introduction: The risk of developing an incisional hernia after primary elective median laparotomy is reported in the literature as being between 5 and 20 percent. The basic of an optimal outcome after midline incision is the appropriate closure technique with or without a prophylactic mesh. The objective of this paper is to critically examine the various closure techniques and, in particular, to present a detailed comparison of the long stitch and short stitch techniques. Method: Based on the available literature, the characteristics of the different closure techniques are described in detail, advantages and disadvantages are compared, and the current status of a practicable recommendation is discussed. Special attention is paid to the criteria of the short stitch technique, such as the suture to incision length ratio, number of stitches and distances, as well as suture material. Results: For elective midline closures, the use of a continuous closure using a slowly absorbable suture material in the small-bites technique with suture to wound ratio of at least 5:1 result in significantly lower risk of complications such as bursting abdomen and less incisional hernia rates compared to the large-bites technique. Conclusion: Based on the present evidence in midline closure after elective laparotomy the small bites technique can be recommended to significantly reduce the rate of incisional hernia.

Does small bite closure reduce the incidence of incisional hernia compared to standard mass closure for midline laparotomy?

A best evidence topic was constructed using a defined protocol. The three-part question addressed was: in closure of midline laparotomy, which technique had lower incidence of incisional hernia: small bite closure or mass closure? The best evidence demonstrated that small bite technique has lower incidence of hernia.

•

Small bite closure technique has lower incidence rates of incisional hernia compared to conventional mass closure.

•

In Elective midline laparotomies, small bite closure should be the standard technique.

•

A maximum of 5 mm space from the edge of the sheath and between stitches was superior to the 10 mm distance in mass closure.

Bone morphogenetic protein-12 inducing tenogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells enhances healing of linea alba incision

The objective of this study was to investigate the curative effects of mesenchymal stem cells' tenogenic differentiation on linea alba incision healing induced by bone morphogenetic protein-12. Mesenchymal stem cells were isolated and induced by 10 ng/ml of bone morphogenetic protein-12 for 48 h. Expression of scleraxis, collagen I and collagen III were examined at 48 h, 5 and 7 days to investigate the tenogenic differentiation. The expression of scleraxis increases continually even in the absence of bone morphogenetic protein-12 for 5 days (P<0.01). The expression of collagen I and III requires persistent inducing. Then fifty Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into five groups: negative control, positive control, sham group, native mesenchymal stem cells and tenogenically differentiated mesenchymal stem cells. Tensiometric testing and modified semiquantitative histological analysis were performed to explore the curative effects. The tension levels in the positive control, sham, native mesenchymal stem cells and tenogenically differentiated mesenchymal stem cells were 44, 41.8, 51.6 and 69.7%, respectively, compared with the negative control. Tenogenically differentiated mesenchymal stem cells exhibited a greater increase in tension compared with positive control, sham and native mesenchymal stem cell groups (P<0.05). From the sections stained with Masson's Trichrome, collagen organization and amount of tenogenically differentiated mesenchymal stem cells was better than the other three groups (P<0.05). In conclusion, mesenchymal stem cells' tenogenic differentiation induced by bone morphogenetic protein-12 can enhance linea alba incision healing.