Variable use of modern abdominal wall closure techniques at emergency laparotomy - an international, cross-sectional survey of surgical practice.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Ian J B Stephens, Emily Kelly, Fernando Ferreira, Marja A Boermeester, Michael E Sugrue
{"title":"Variable use of modern abdominal wall closure techniques at emergency laparotomy - an international, cross-sectional survey of surgical practice.","authors":"Ian J B Stephens, Emily Kelly, Fernando Ferreira, Marja A Boermeester, Michael E Sugrue","doi":"10.1007/s00068-025-02804-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Incisional hernias (IH) occur after 20-30% of laparotomies. Modern closure techniques including small bite closure and prophylactic mesh augmentation (PMA) demonstrate significant reduction in IH rates. European and American Hernia Society guidelines suggest use of small bite closure and consideration of PMA at elective laparotomy closure but do not make a recommendation for emergency surgery. International surveys demonstrate poor uptake of small bite closure and PMA. This survey aims to assess the uptake of these techniques specifically in emergency abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online, cross-sectional survey was circulated through emergency general surgery (EGS) and abdominal closure networks between June and August 2024. This interrogated surgeons' technical approach to all elements of emergency laparotomy closure including use of wound bundles, small bite, suture-to-wound ratio, suture choice, and PMA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey was completed by 234 general surgeons from 32 countries. Wound bundle components varied between surgeons. Small bite closure was used by 85.8% during midline laparotomy closure but only 42.2% of surgeons used 5 mm wide tissue bites placed every 5 mm. Suture-to-wound ratio was rarely measured (7.7%). A looped PDS (size 0 or 1) was used preferentially (42.7%). Self-locking (15.8%) and antiseptic coated sutures (20.2%) were used infrequently. One in ten surgeons used PMA and most often placed the mesh in the retrorectus space (39.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Uptake of new techniques in emergency laparotomy has been variable and with limited penetrance amongst emergency general surgeons. Many surgeons are using adapted versions of the original descriptions of these approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":"51 1","pages":"141"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11919986/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02804-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Incisional hernias (IH) occur after 20-30% of laparotomies. Modern closure techniques including small bite closure and prophylactic mesh augmentation (PMA) demonstrate significant reduction in IH rates. European and American Hernia Society guidelines suggest use of small bite closure and consideration of PMA at elective laparotomy closure but do not make a recommendation for emergency surgery. International surveys demonstrate poor uptake of small bite closure and PMA. This survey aims to assess the uptake of these techniques specifically in emergency abdominal surgery.

Methods: An online, cross-sectional survey was circulated through emergency general surgery (EGS) and abdominal closure networks between June and August 2024. This interrogated surgeons' technical approach to all elements of emergency laparotomy closure including use of wound bundles, small bite, suture-to-wound ratio, suture choice, and PMA.

Results: The survey was completed by 234 general surgeons from 32 countries. Wound bundle components varied between surgeons. Small bite closure was used by 85.8% during midline laparotomy closure but only 42.2% of surgeons used 5 mm wide tissue bites placed every 5 mm. Suture-to-wound ratio was rarely measured (7.7%). A looped PDS (size 0 or 1) was used preferentially (42.7%). Self-locking (15.8%) and antiseptic coated sutures (20.2%) were used infrequently. One in ten surgeons used PMA and most often placed the mesh in the retrorectus space (39.6%).

Conclusion: Uptake of new techniques in emergency laparotomy has been variable and with limited penetrance amongst emergency general surgeons. Many surgeons are using adapted versions of the original descriptions of these approaches.

急诊开腹手术中现代腹壁闭合技术的不同使用情况--一项国际性外科实践横断面调查。
目的:切口疝(IH)发生在20-30%的剖腹手术后。包括小咬合和预防性补片(PMA)在内的现代封闭技术显示出IH率的显著降低。欧美疝学会指南建议在择期剖腹闭合时使用小咬口闭合和考虑PMA,但不建议用于急诊手术。国际调查表明,小咬合和PMA的吸收情况不佳。这项调查的目的是评估这些技术的吸收,特别是在紧急腹部手术。方法:在2024年6月至8月期间,通过急诊普通外科(EGS)和腹部闭合网络进行在线横断面调查。本研究询问了外科医生在急诊剖腹手术中缝合的所有技术方法,包括伤口束的使用、小咬伤、缝线与伤口的比例、缝线的选择和PMA。结果:本调查由来自32个国家的234名普外科医生完成。不同外科医生的伤口束成分不同。85.8%的医生在剖腹中线缝合时使用小咬口闭合,但只有42.2%的医生使用每5毫米放置5毫米宽的组织咬口。缝线伤口比很少测量(7.7%)。优先使用环形PDS(尺寸为0或1)(42.7%)。自锁缝线(15.8%)和抗菌涂层缝线(20.2%)使用频率较低。十分之一的外科医生使用PMA,最常将补片放置在后直肌间隙(39.6%)。结论:急诊剖腹手术中新技术的采用情况不一,在急诊普通外科医生中普及率有限。许多外科医生正在使用这些方法的原始描述的改编版本。
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
×
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