Comparative Study of Paramedian and Midline Incision in Laparotomy for Peritonitis due to Non-traumatic Gastro-intestinal Tract Perforation

Q4 Medicine
Md Zillur Rahman, Md Aziz Ullah, Sadia Rahman, Soma Rahman
{"title":"Comparative Study of Paramedian and Midline Incision in Laparotomy for Peritonitis due to Non-traumatic Gastro-intestinal Tract Perforation","authors":"Md Zillur Rahman, Md Aziz Ullah, Sadia Rahman, Soma Rahman","doi":"10.3329/medtoday.v36i1.72891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: A prospective observational study was conducted to compare the paramedian incision with midline incision in gastro-intestinal tract perforation. Objectives: To identify better or superior incision which may reduce post operative mortality and morbidity after laparotomy. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational Hospital based study was conducted from January 2009 to June 2009 at department surgery of Shaheed Ziaur Medical College Hospital, Bogura. A total 100 patients of peritonitis due to non-traumatic gastro-intestinal tract perforation were taken for study. Sample were collected by Convenience (purposive) sampling method. Midline incision and Para median incisions were performed as per standard technique. The details of operations, post-operative complications and follow up to be recorded and analyzed. Results: Opening time and closing time in midline incision is significantly less than paramedian (P <0.001). Incidence of wound infection and incidence of wound dehiscence in our study in midline group was less compared to paramedian group buy it is not significant. All forms of dehiscence ranging from superficial dehiscence to burst abdomen were included. Incidence of incisional hernia was significantly higher in midline incision (P<0.05). Healing time was significantly lower in midline compared to Paramedian group (P<0.05). Conclusion: It is concluded that midline incision is preferred compared to paramedian incision. Incidence of wound dehiscence and wound infection is less in midline incision.\nMedicine Today 2023 Vol.36 (1): 45-49","PeriodicalId":39348,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Today","volume":" 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/medtoday.v36i1.72891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: A prospective observational study was conducted to compare the paramedian incision with midline incision in gastro-intestinal tract perforation. Objectives: To identify better or superior incision which may reduce post operative mortality and morbidity after laparotomy. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational Hospital based study was conducted from January 2009 to June 2009 at department surgery of Shaheed Ziaur Medical College Hospital, Bogura. A total 100 patients of peritonitis due to non-traumatic gastro-intestinal tract perforation were taken for study. Sample were collected by Convenience (purposive) sampling method. Midline incision and Para median incisions were performed as per standard technique. The details of operations, post-operative complications and follow up to be recorded and analyzed. Results: Opening time and closing time in midline incision is significantly less than paramedian (P <0.001). Incidence of wound infection and incidence of wound dehiscence in our study in midline group was less compared to paramedian group buy it is not significant. All forms of dehiscence ranging from superficial dehiscence to burst abdomen were included. Incidence of incisional hernia was significantly higher in midline incision (P<0.05). Healing time was significantly lower in midline compared to Paramedian group (P<0.05). Conclusion: It is concluded that midline incision is preferred compared to paramedian incision. Incidence of wound dehiscence and wound infection is less in midline incision. Medicine Today 2023 Vol.36 (1): 45-49
非外伤性胃肠道穿孔导致腹膜炎的腹腔镜手术中副中线切口与中线切口的比较研究
简介一项前瞻性观察研究旨在比较胃肠道穿孔时的医侧切口和中线切口。研究目的确定可降低开腹手术后死亡率和发病率的更好或更优切口。材料与方法:2009 年 1 月至 2009 年 6 月,在博古拉的 Shaheed Ziaur 医学院医院外科开展了一项前瞻性医院观察研究。共有 100 名非外伤性胃肠道穿孔导致的腹膜炎患者参与研究。样本通过便利(目的性)抽样法收集。按照标准技术进行中线切口和副中线切口。记录并分析手术细节、术后并发症和随访情况。结果中线切口的开放时间和闭合时间明显少于副中线切口(P <0.001)。在我们的研究中,中线切口组的伤口感染率和伤口开裂率低于副切口组,但差异不明显。所有形式的开裂都包括在内,从浅表开裂到腹部破裂。中线切口的切口疝发生率明显更高(P<0.05)。中线组的愈合时间明显低于副腹部组(P<0.05)。结论结论:中线切口比侧切口更佳。中线切口的伤口开裂和伤口感染发生率较低:45-49
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medicine Today
Medicine Today Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信