AIM: Specific laparoscopy-related complications, such as incisional hernia (trocar hernia) or hemorrhage, are worthy of our special attention. Preventing and managing these complications safely and efficiently are important, suggesting that a definite closure of the 10-12 mm port wound after laparoscopy is needed; for this, a newer, simpler method was used. METHODS:Ninety-six patients with benign ovarian tumor warranting laparoscopic surgery were enrolled into the study. Forty-eight patients (50%) underwent a Foley catheter-assisted port wound closure (Foley group) and the remaining patients (50%) underwent a conventional port would closure (control group). The outcome was measured by comparing operative time, the amount of suture material used (difficulty of wound closure), therapeutic efficacy (hernia), postoperative complications (bleeding, hematoma, and wound pain by a self-reported six-point verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS-6)) and anesthesia use as measured by an analgesic usage score (AUS), and dissatisfaction with the cosmetic results, in both groups. RESULTS: The general characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. There were no statistical differences in mean operative time, therapeutic efficacy, and postoperative complications between the two groups. However, the amount of extra suture material needed was significantly less in the Foley group compared to the control group (1.04 +/- 0.08 vs 1.29 +/- 0.44, P = 0.015, and 4.2 vs 25%, P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: Wound closure with the assistance of a Foley catheter offers an easy and secure way to close a 10-12 mm port wound.
RCT Entities:
AIM: Specific laparoscopy-related complications, such as incisional hernia (trocar hernia) or hemorrhage, are worthy of our special attention. Preventing and managing these complications safely and efficiently are important, suggesting that a definite closure of the 10-12 mm port wound after laparoscopy is needed; for this, a newer, simpler method was used. METHODS: Ninety-six patients with benign ovarian tumor warranting laparoscopic surgery were enrolled into the study. Forty-eight patients (50%) underwent a Foley catheter-assisted port wound closure (Foley group) and the remaining patients (50%) underwent a conventional port would closure (control group). The outcome was measured by comparing operative time, the amount of suture material used (difficulty of wound closure), therapeutic efficacy (hernia), postoperative complications (bleeding, hematoma, and wound pain by a self-reported six-point verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS-6)) and anesthesia use as measured by an analgesic usage score (AUS), and dissatisfaction with the cosmetic results, in both groups. RESULTS: The general characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. There were no statistical differences in mean operative time, therapeutic efficacy, and postoperative complications between the two groups. However, the amount of extra suture material needed was significantly less in the Foley group compared to the control group (1.04 +/- 0.08 vs 1.29 +/- 0.44, P = 0.015, and 4.2 vs 25%, P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSION: Wound closure with the assistance of a Foley catheter offers an easy and secure way to close a 10-12 mm port wound.