BACKGROUND AND AIM: The use of abdominal binders after laparotomy is a question of habit. Scientific evidence of their usefulness is limited. The aims of this work were to review the scientific literature and to depict the practices of French surgeons regarding the use of these devices. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature about the use of abdominal binders after laparotomy was conducted. In order to depict surgeons' habits, an anonymous questionnaire was sent to all surgical departments affiliated to the FRENCH network (Federation of Surgical Research) and their surgical contacts. They were all asked about their use of binders, the type of binders they ordered, the expected benefit, the cost and the need for a randomized trial in this field. RESULTS: Only four trials have been published regarding the use of abdominal binders after laparotomy, all with a small number of patients. Some authors suggested that wearing binders procured a benefit in terms of postoperative comfort, but no significant difference was found. One study also suggested an improvement in respiratory volumes. No study focused on incisional hernia. Regarding the survey of practices, 50 questionnaires were retained for the final analysis (one questionnaire per department of surgery). The use of this device is really very frequent in France (94 % of surgeons order them), a habit usually acquired during the training in surgery. The main expected benefit is the prevention of abdominal wall dehiscence (83 %), but also an improvement in patients' postoperative comfort and pain (66 %). Although some surgeons order an abdominal binder for all their patients, most use them in selected patients (according to the operation and the patients' characteristics). CONCLUSION: Abdominal binders are frequently ordered by French surgeons after laparotomy. The expected benefit is the prevention of abdominal-wall complications, even though no data actually support this practice. Binders might have a benefit in terms of postoperative pain relief, but this needs to be analyzed. A prospective randomized trial is warranted.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The use of abdominal binders after laparotomy is a question of habit. Scientific evidence of their usefulness is limited. The aims of this work were to review the scientific literature and to depict the practices of French surgeons regarding the use of these devices. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature about the use of abdominal binders after laparotomy was conducted. In order to depict surgeons' habits, an anonymous questionnaire was sent to all surgical departments affiliated to the FRENCH network (Federation of Surgical Research) and their surgical contacts. They were all asked about their use of binders, the type of binders they ordered, the expected benefit, the cost and the need for a randomized trial in this field. RESULTS: Only four trials have been published regarding the use of abdominal binders after laparotomy, all with a small number of patients. Some authors suggested that wearing binders procured a benefit in terms of postoperative comfort, but no significant difference was found. One study also suggested an improvement in respiratory volumes. No study focused on incisional hernia. Regarding the survey of practices, 50 questionnaires were retained for the final analysis (one questionnaire per department of surgery). The use of this device is really very frequent in France (94 % of surgeons order them), a habit usually acquired during the training in surgery. The main expected benefit is the prevention of abdominal wall dehiscence (83 %), but also an improvement in patients' postoperative comfort and pain (66 %). Although some surgeons order an abdominal binder for all their patients, most use them in selected patients (according to the operation and the patients' characteristics). CONCLUSION: Abdominal binders are frequently ordered by French surgeons after laparotomy. The expected benefit is the prevention of abdominal-wall complications, even though no data actually support this practice. Binders might have a benefit in terms of postoperative pain relief, but this needs to be analyzed. A prospective randomized trial is warranted.
Authors: Mark T M van den Baar; Job van der Palen; Marianne I Vroon; Paul Bertelink; Ron Hendrix Journal: Emerg Med J Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Jochen Schuld; Jan E Slotta; Simone Schuld; Otto Kollmar; Martin K Schilling; Sven Richter Journal: World J Surg Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: F E Muysoms; S A Antoniou; K Bury; G Campanelli; J Conze; D Cuccurullo; A C de Beaux; E B Deerenberg; B East; R H Fortelny; J-F Gillion; N A Henriksen; L Israelsson; A Jairam; A Jänes; J Jeekel; M López-Cano; M Miserez; S Morales-Conde; D L Sanders; M P Simons; M Śmietański; L Venclauskas; F Berrevoet Journal: Hernia Date: 2015-01-25 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Christoph Paasch; Gianluca De Santo; Nouf Aljedani; Pedro Ortiz; Lisa Bruckert; Michael Hünerbein; Eric Lorenz; Roland Croner Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2021-09-24 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Christoph Paasch; Eric Lorenz; Stefan Anders; Gianluca De Santo; Katherina Boettge; Ulrich Gauger; Roland Croner; Martin W Strik Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2019-06-15
Authors: Summaya Saeed; Khaled Abdullah Rage; Amjad Siraj Memon; Sarah Kazi; Khursheed Ahmed Samo; Sana Shahid; Aun Ali Journal: Cureus Date: 2019-10-03