Subcutaneous barbed suture, as an adjunct to staples, reduces post-operative wound drainage in total knee arthroplasty

Q4 Medicine
Sefa W. Canbilen, Khaldoun El-Abed, M. Khalefa, Riaz Ahmad
{"title":"Subcutaneous barbed suture, as an adjunct to staples, reduces post-operative wound drainage in total knee arthroplasty","authors":"Sefa W. Canbilen,&nbsp;Khaldoun El-Abed,&nbsp;M. Khalefa,&nbsp;Riaz Ahmad","doi":"10.1016/j.jajs.2021.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p><span>Prolonged wound drainage (&gt;72 h), has been associated with increased risk of </span>surgical site infection<span> and prolonged hospital admission. This study reviews the outcome in three different wound closure methods, following total knee arthroplasty<span>. We also analysed the cost effectiveness of these methods.</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span>A total of 69 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: 22 with stapled skin closure; 21 with tissue adhesive and stapled skin closure and 26 with subcutaneous </span>barbed suture instead of a non barbed suture with stapled skin closure, were studied to review the number of dressing changes, prolonged wound drainage (&gt;72 h), length of hospital stay and delayed discharge (&gt;5 days). Statistical analysis was conducted using Minitab Statistical Software® and statistical significance was set at p &lt; 0.05.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The median hospital stay for the staples only group was 4 days (inter-quartile range [IQR] 3–5), for the adhesive group was 4 days ([IQR] 3–6) and for the barbed suture group was 3 days ([IQR] 3–4) (p = 0.009). The rates of prolonged wound drainage for the staples only group was 8 (36.4%), for the adhesive group was 4 (19.0%) and for barbed suture group was 0 (0%) (p = 0.004).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The use of subcutaneous barbed sutures was associated with reduced number of wound dressing changes, reduced risk of prolonged wound drainage and shorter hospital stay, as well as conferring a saving of at least £236.60 per patient, compared to the other two skin closure methods.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38088,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arthroscopy and Joint Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arthroscopy and Joint Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214963521000900","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

Background

Prolonged wound drainage (>72 h), has been associated with increased risk of surgical site infection and prolonged hospital admission. This study reviews the outcome in three different wound closure methods, following total knee arthroplasty. We also analysed the cost effectiveness of these methods.

Methods

A total of 69 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: 22 with stapled skin closure; 21 with tissue adhesive and stapled skin closure and 26 with subcutaneous barbed suture instead of a non barbed suture with stapled skin closure, were studied to review the number of dressing changes, prolonged wound drainage (>72 h), length of hospital stay and delayed discharge (>5 days). Statistical analysis was conducted using Minitab Statistical Software® and statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

The median hospital stay for the staples only group was 4 days (inter-quartile range [IQR] 3–5), for the adhesive group was 4 days ([IQR] 3–6) and for the barbed suture group was 3 days ([IQR] 3–4) (p = 0.009). The rates of prolonged wound drainage for the staples only group was 8 (36.4%), for the adhesive group was 4 (19.0%) and for barbed suture group was 0 (0%) (p = 0.004).

Conclusion

The use of subcutaneous barbed sutures was associated with reduced number of wound dressing changes, reduced risk of prolonged wound drainage and shorter hospital stay, as well as conferring a saving of at least £236.60 per patient, compared to the other two skin closure methods.

在全膝关节置换术中,皮下倒刺缝线作为订书钉的辅助,可减少术后伤口引流
背景:伤口引流时间延长(72小时)与手术部位感染风险增加和住院时间延长有关。本研究回顾了全膝关节置换术后三种不同伤口闭合方法的结果。我们还分析了这些方法的成本效益。方法69例全膝关节置换术:22例采用吻合器缝合;21例采用组织粘接剂缝合皮肤,26例采用皮下有刺缝合代替非有刺缝合缝合缝合皮肤,对换药次数、伤口引流时间延长(72小时)、住院时间和延迟出院时间(5天)进行了研究。采用Minitab统计软件®进行统计分析,p <为统计学显著性;0.05.结果单钉组住院时间中位数为4天(四分位数间距[IQR] 3 ~ 5),粘接组住院时间中位数为4天([IQR] 3 ~ 6),倒钩缝合组住院时间中位数为3天([IQR] 3 ~ 4) (p = 0.009)。单钉组8例(36.4%),粘接剂组4例(19.0%),倒钩缝合组0例(0%)(p = 0.004)。结论与其他两种皮肤缝合方法相比,使用皮下倒刺缝合线可以减少伤口换药次数,减少伤口长期引流的风险,缩短住院时间,并且每位患者至少节省236.60英镑。
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
Journal of Arthroscopy and Joint Surgery
Journal of Arthroscopy and Joint Surgery Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: Journal of Arthroscopy and Joint Surgery (JAJS) is committed to bring forth scientific manuscripts in the form of original research articles, current concept reviews, meta-analyses, case reports and letters to the editor. The focus of the Journal is to present wide-ranging, multi-disciplinary perspectives on the problems of the joints that are amenable with Arthroscopy and Arthroplasty. Though Arthroscopy and Arthroplasty entail surgical procedures, the Journal shall not restrict itself to these purely surgical procedures and will also encompass pharmacological, rehabilitative and physical measures that can prevent or postpone the execution of a surgical procedure. The Journal will also publish scientific research related to tissues other than joints that would ultimately have an effect on the joint function.
×
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