选择性手外科伤口闭合中可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线的回顾性比较。

IF 0.5 Q4 SURGERY
Journal of Hand and Microsurgery Pub Date : 2024-11-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jham.2024.100178
Daniel Nemirov, Eva Dentcheva, Taylor Thurmond, Abdo Bachoura, David Hirsch, Rick Tosti
{"title":"选择性手外科伤口闭合中可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线的回顾性比较。","authors":"Daniel Nemirov, Eva Dentcheva, Taylor Thurmond, Abdo Bachoura, David Hirsch, Rick Tosti","doi":"10.1016/j.jham.2024.100178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Suture selection in elective hand surgery closures has traditionally been non-absorbable sutures (NAS) rather than absorbable sutures (AS). The goal of this study was to evaluate absorbable versus non-absorbable closures of various primary elective hand procedures. Our group hypothesized that no differences in major short-term outcomes would exist.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of 867 patients was conducted. Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes specific to surgical cases from forearm to fingertip. Patients undergoing emergent trauma operations or debridement for infection were excluded. Two experimental groups were evaluated: one in which surgical wound closures were performed with non-absorbable suture (nylon) vs one in which closures were performed with absorbable suture (monocryl). Outcomes measured were wound dehiscence, need for postoperative antibiotics, 30-day general complications, and reoperations within 60 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 867 patients were investigated in this study. The AS cohort consisted of 455 patients whereas the NAS group contained 412. No significant differences were noted between the AS and NAS groups with regards to age, gender, or diabetes. Postoperatively, there was no significant difference in rates of dehiscence, infections, or antibiotic prescription. Furthermore, rates of 30-day complications (1.36 % vs 1.47 %; p = 1.000), 60-day complications (0.68 % vs 2.19 %; p = 0.113) and reoperation (1.13 % versus 1.46 %; p = 0.903) were similar between the AS and NAS cohorts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wound closure in hand surgery using absorbable suture appears to have comparable outcomes with non-absorbable suture.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>","PeriodicalId":45368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery","volume":"17 1","pages":"100178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11770203/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A retrospective comparison of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for elective hand surgery wound closures.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Nemirov, Eva Dentcheva, Taylor Thurmond, Abdo Bachoura, David Hirsch, Rick Tosti\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jham.2024.100178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Suture selection in elective hand surgery closures has traditionally been non-absorbable sutures (NAS) rather than absorbable sutures (AS). The goal of this study was to evaluate absorbable versus non-absorbable closures of various primary elective hand procedures. Our group hypothesized that no differences in major short-term outcomes would exist.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of 867 patients was conducted. Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes specific to surgical cases from forearm to fingertip. Patients undergoing emergent trauma operations or debridement for infection were excluded. Two experimental groups were evaluated: one in which surgical wound closures were performed with non-absorbable suture (nylon) vs one in which closures were performed with absorbable suture (monocryl). Outcomes measured were wound dehiscence, need for postoperative antibiotics, 30-day general complications, and reoperations within 60 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 867 patients were investigated in this study. The AS cohort consisted of 455 patients whereas the NAS group contained 412. No significant differences were noted between the AS and NAS groups with regards to age, gender, or diabetes. Postoperatively, there was no significant difference in rates of dehiscence, infections, or antibiotic prescription. Furthermore, rates of 30-day complications (1.36 % vs 1.47 %; p = 1.000), 60-day complications (0.68 % vs 2.19 %; p = 0.113) and reoperation (1.13 % versus 1.46 %; p = 0.903) were similar between the AS and NAS cohorts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wound closure in hand surgery using absorbable suture appears to have comparable outcomes with non-absorbable suture.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"100178\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11770203/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jham.2024.100178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand and Microsurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jham.2024.100178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在手部手术闭合中,传统的缝线选择是不可吸收缝线(NAS)而不是可吸收缝线(AS)。本研究的目的是评估各种首选手部手术的可吸收性和不可吸收性闭合。我们的小组假设在主要的短期结果上不存在差异。方法:对867例患者进行回顾性分析。从前臂到指尖,使用当前手术术语(CPT)代码对患者进行识别。排除因感染而进行紧急创伤手术或清创的患者。对两个实验组进行评估:一组使用不可吸收缝线(尼龙)缝合手术伤口,另一组使用可吸收缝线(monocryl)缝合。测量的结果是伤口裂开、术后抗生素用量、30天内的一般并发症和60天内的再手术。结果:本研究共调查了867例患者。AS组有455名患者,NAS组有412名患者。AS组和NAS组在年龄、性别或糖尿病方面没有显著差异。术后,裂开、感染或抗生素处方的发生率无显著差异。此外,30天并发症发生率(1.36% vs 1.47%;P = 1.000), 60天并发症(0.68% vs 2.19%;P = 0.113)和再手术(1.13% vs 1.46%;p = 0.903)在AS组和NAS组之间相似。结论:在手部手术中使用可吸收缝线与不可吸收缝线的缝合效果相当。证据等级:3。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A retrospective comparison of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for elective hand surgery wound closures.

Background: Suture selection in elective hand surgery closures has traditionally been non-absorbable sutures (NAS) rather than absorbable sutures (AS). The goal of this study was to evaluate absorbable versus non-absorbable closures of various primary elective hand procedures. Our group hypothesized that no differences in major short-term outcomes would exist.

Methods: A retrospective review of 867 patients was conducted. Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes specific to surgical cases from forearm to fingertip. Patients undergoing emergent trauma operations or debridement for infection were excluded. Two experimental groups were evaluated: one in which surgical wound closures were performed with non-absorbable suture (nylon) vs one in which closures were performed with absorbable suture (monocryl). Outcomes measured were wound dehiscence, need for postoperative antibiotics, 30-day general complications, and reoperations within 60 days.

Results: A total of 867 patients were investigated in this study. The AS cohort consisted of 455 patients whereas the NAS group contained 412. No significant differences were noted between the AS and NAS groups with regards to age, gender, or diabetes. Postoperatively, there was no significant difference in rates of dehiscence, infections, or antibiotic prescription. Furthermore, rates of 30-day complications (1.36 % vs 1.47 %; p = 1.000), 60-day complications (0.68 % vs 2.19 %; p = 0.113) and reoperation (1.13 % versus 1.46 %; p = 0.903) were similar between the AS and NAS cohorts.

Conclusion: Wound closure in hand surgery using absorbable suture appears to have comparable outcomes with non-absorbable suture.

Level of evidence: 3.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
39
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信