Open or Closed? Management of Skin Incisions After Emergency General Surgery Laparotomies

Introduction

We sought to determine if there was a relationship between skin management and surgical site infections (SSIs) among patients undergoing a laparotomy for emergency general surgery (EGS). We hypothesize that skin closure technique is not associated with SSI.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of adult patients (>18 y) who underwent an exploratory laparotomy for EGS conditions within 6 h of surgical consultation from 2015 to 2019. Patients whose fascia was not closed during the index operation were excluded. Patients were divided into groups: open skin (OS) and closed skin (CS). OS included negative pressure wound therapy or wet-to-dry gauze; CS included closure with staples or sutures. Our primary outcome was the rate of SSI.

Results

The cohort comprised 388 patients: 42.3% OS (n = 164) and 57.7% CS (n = 224). The OS group had greater rates of systemic inflammatory response syndrome [SIRS] (54.9% versus 27.7%, P < 0.0001), hollow viscus perforation [HVP] (71.3% versus 20.5%, P < 0.0001), and peritoneal drains (51.2% versus 17.9%, P < 0.0001). Rates of OS management increased as wound class severity increased (0% [I] versus 12.2% [II] versus 15.9% [III] versus 72% [IV], P < 0.0001). The SSI rate for the cohort was 3.6% (n = 14); there was no difference in SSI rates (2.7% versus 4.9%, P = 0.3) between the CS or OS groups. Median length of stay was longer for the OS group (10 d versus 6.5 d, P < 0.0001). Independent predictors of OS management were SIRS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.93, P = 0.04), HVP (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.09-3.8, P = 0.03), and class III/IV wounds (aOR 8.65, 95% CI 4.43-16.89, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

OS management occurs more often in patients with SIRS, HVP, and dirty wounds after EGS laparotomies. However, we found no difference in SSI between groups, suggesting that skin closure can be considered in contaminated or dirty wounds.