Abdominal wall closure: How do we do it in Spain? Survey of specialist general surgeons members of the AEC (Spanish Society of Surgeons).

Montserrat Juvany, Alejandro Bravo-Salva, Jose Antonio Pereira-Rodríguez
{"title":"Abdominal wall closure: How do we do it in Spain? Survey of specialist general surgeons members of the AEC (Spanish Society of Surgeons).","authors":"Montserrat Juvany, Alejandro Bravo-Salva, Jose Antonio Pereira-Rodríguez","doi":"10.1016/j.cireng.2024.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the knowledge of abdominal wall closure in a cohort of specialist general surgeons who are members of the AEC and to see its adequacy with current recommendations. Sub-analysis in terms of years of specialization.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Individual questionnaire of 21 questions on abdominal wall closure in elective and urgent context.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 371 responses were received from specialist surgeons who are members of the AEC. Closure of the median laparotomy is performed with continuous suture in 99.7% and with slowly absorbable materials in 95.4%. 88.4% of surgeons report using the ratio equal to or greater than 4:1 between suture length and incision length (SL:IL) and short stitches. These results are equivalent in transverse and urgent elective laparotomy. 85.2% of the respondents systematically close trocars of 10 mm or more and 30.7% use prophylactic mesh in high-risk patients. Surgeons with less than 10 years of experience use the ratio ≥ 4:1 SL:SI and short stitches more than surgeons with more experience (93.4% vs 84.9%; P = .013).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Abdominal wall closure among general surgeons who are members of the ACS is adequate and adjusted to the recommendations with a tendency to improve among surgeons with less experience. There is an opportunity for improvement in the use of prophylactic mesh in high-risk patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":93935,"journal":{"name":"Cirugia espanola","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cirugia espanola","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cireng.2024.12.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the knowledge of abdominal wall closure in a cohort of specialist general surgeons who are members of the AEC and to see its adequacy with current recommendations. Sub-analysis in terms of years of specialization.

Material and methods: Individual questionnaire of 21 questions on abdominal wall closure in elective and urgent context.

Results: A total of 371 responses were received from specialist surgeons who are members of the AEC. Closure of the median laparotomy is performed with continuous suture in 99.7% and with slowly absorbable materials in 95.4%. 88.4% of surgeons report using the ratio equal to or greater than 4:1 between suture length and incision length (SL:IL) and short stitches. These results are equivalent in transverse and urgent elective laparotomy. 85.2% of the respondents systematically close trocars of 10 mm or more and 30.7% use prophylactic mesh in high-risk patients. Surgeons with less than 10 years of experience use the ratio ≥ 4:1 SL:SI and short stitches more than surgeons with more experience (93.4% vs 84.9%; P = .013).

Conclusions: Abdominal wall closure among general surgeons who are members of the ACS is adequate and adjusted to the recommendations with a tendency to improve among surgeons with less experience. There is an opportunity for improvement in the use of prophylactic mesh in high-risk patients.

腹壁闭合术:西班牙是怎么做的?对 AEC(西班牙外科医生协会)成员中的专科普外科医生进行的调查。
目的:评估作为AEC成员的一组专科普通外科医生对腹壁闭合的认识,并观察其是否符合目前的建议。按专业年限进行子分析。材料与方法:对选择性和紧急情况下腹壁闭合的21个问题进行问卷调查。结果:共收到371份来自AEC成员的专科外科医生的回复。连续缝线缝合腹正中切口占99.7%,缓慢可吸收材料缝合占95.4%。88.4%的外科医生报告使用缝合长度与切口长度(SL:IL)之比等于或大于4:1和短针。这些结果在横向和紧急择期剖腹手术中是相同的。85.2%的应答者系统闭合套管针大于10毫米,30.7%的高危患者使用预防性补片。经验不足10年的外科医生使用SL:IL和短针的比例≥4:1 (93.4% vs 84.9%;p = 0.013)。结论:作为ACS成员的普通外科医生的腹壁闭合术是足够的,并根据建议进行调整,经验较少的外科医生有改善的趋势。高危患者预防性补片的使用仍有改进的机会。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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