Luis Angel Medina Andrade1, Franz Yeudiel Pérez Muñoz2, María Valeria Jiménez Báez3, Stephanie Serrano Collazos2, Maria de Los Angeles Martinez Ferretiz2, Brenda Ruiz2, Oscar Montes2, Stephanie Woolf2, Jessica Gonzalez Noriega4, Uriel Maldonado Aparicio4, Israel Gonzalez Gonzalez5. 1. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Hospital General Regional No. 17, General Surgery Department, Quintana Roo University, Av. Politécnico Manzana 1 Lote 1 Región 509, C.P. 55750, Cancún, Quintana Roo, Mexico. buismedina_5@hotmail.com. 2. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Hospital General Regional No. 17, General Surgery Department, Quintana Roo University, Av. Politécnico Manzana 1 Lote 1 Región 509, C.P. 55750, Cancún, Quintana Roo, Mexico. 3. Health Research Department, Quintana Roo, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Av. Politécnico Manzana 1 Lote 1 Región 509, C.P. 55750, Cancún, Quintana Roo, Mexico. 4. Hospital General de Zona #1. Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 5 de Febrero, Col. Pueblo Nuevo, La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. 5. General Surgery Department, The American British Cowdray Medical Center I.A.P, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Sur 136 #116, Col. Las Americas, Alvaro Obregon, C.P. 01120, Distrito Federal, Mexico.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Appendectomy is the most frequent and urgent gastrointestinal surgery. Overtime, the surgical techniques have been improved upon, in order to reduce complications, get better cosmetic results, and limit the discomfort associated with this procedure, by its high impact in the surgery departments. The traditional skin closure is associated with a poor cosmetic result and it requires stitches removal, alongside the pain associated with this procedure, and no benefits were demonstrated in the literature regarding separated stitches over intradermic stitch. This is a randomized controlled trial, and our objective is to compare two different skin closure techniques in open appendectomy. METHODS: A prospective randomized trial method was used, with a total number of 208 patients participating in the study, after acute appendicitis diagnosis in the emergency department. They were randomized into two groups: patients who would receive skin closure with a unique absorbable intradermic stitch (Group A) and another group that would receive the traditional closure technique, consistent in non-absorbable separated stitches (Group B). General characteristics like gender, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidities, and allergies were registered. Days of Evolution (DOE) until surgery, previous use of antibiotics, complicated or uncomplicated appendicitis, surgical time, and wound complications like skin infection, dehiscence, seroma or abscess were also registered in each case. RESULTS:8 patients were excluded due to negative appendicitis during surgery and lack of follow-up. Two groups, each containing 100 patients, were formed. General characteristics and parity were compared, and no statistically significant differences were observed. Difference in the surgical time (Group A: 47.35 min vs Group B: 54.13 min, p < .001) and cases with complicated appendicitis (Group A: 58 and Group B:38, p = .005) were found to be statistically significant. Four wound complications were reported, and the incidence of seroma (Group A:0 and Group B:5, p = .02) and abscess (Group A:2 and Group B:8, p = .05) were found to have some statistical significant difference. In a multivariate analysis, a relationship was observed between BMI > 25 kg/m2 and seroma (p = .006), BMI > 25 kg/m2 and abscess (p = .02), surgical time >50 min and seroma (p < .001), >2 DOE and abscess (p = .001), and complicated appendicitis with seroma development (p = .03). CONCLUSION:Open appendectomy skin closure with a unique absorbable intradermic stitch is safe, with a reduced seroma and abscess incidence, compared to traditional closure, and an equivalent dehiscence and superficial infection incidence, allowing a lower hospital attention cost and length of hospital stay for treatment of complications. The relative risk of complications with traditional skin closure is 2.91 higher, compared to this new technique.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Appendectomy is the most frequent and urgent gastrointestinal surgery. Overtime, the surgical techniques have been improved upon, in order to reduce complications, get better cosmetic results, and limit the discomfort associated with this procedure, by its high impact in the surgery departments. The traditional skin closure is associated with a poor cosmetic result and it requires stitches removal, alongside the pain associated with this procedure, and no benefits were demonstrated in the literature regarding separated stitches over intradermic stitch. This is a randomized controlled trial, and our objective is to compare two different skin closure techniques in open appendectomy. METHODS: A prospective randomized trial method was used, with a total number of 208 patients participating in the study, after acute appendicitis diagnosis in the emergency department. They were randomized into two groups: patients who would receive skin closure with a unique absorbable intradermic stitch (Group A) and another group that would receive the traditional closure technique, consistent in non-absorbable separated stitches (Group B). General characteristics like gender, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidities, and allergies were registered. Days of Evolution (DOE) until surgery, previous use of antibiotics, complicated or uncomplicated appendicitis, surgical time, and wound complications like skin infection, dehiscence, seroma or abscess were also registered in each case. RESULTS: 8 patients were excluded due to negative appendicitis during surgery and lack of follow-up. Two groups, each containing 100 patients, were formed. General characteristics and parity were compared, and no statistically significant differences were observed. Difference in the surgical time (Group A: 47.35 min vs Group B: 54.13 min, p < .001) and cases with complicated appendicitis (Group A: 58 and Group B:38, p = .005) were found to be statistically significant. Four wound complications were reported, and the incidence of seroma (Group A:0 and Group B:5, p = .02) and abscess (Group A:2 and Group B:8, p = .05) were found to have some statistical significant difference. In a multivariate analysis, a relationship was observed between BMI > 25 kg/m2 and seroma (p = .006), BMI > 25 kg/m2 and abscess (p = .02), surgical time >50 min and seroma (p < .001), >2 DOE and abscess (p = .001), and complicated appendicitis with seroma development (p = .03). CONCLUSION: Open appendectomy skin closure with a unique absorbable intradermic stitch is safe, with a reduced seroma and abscess incidence, compared to traditional closure, and an equivalent dehiscence and superficial infection incidence, allowing a lower hospital attention cost and length of hospital stay for treatment of complications. The relative risk of complications with traditional skin closure is 2.91 higher, compared to this new technique.
Authors: Sheraz R Markar; Vishal Venkat-Raman; Alison Ho; Alan Karthikesalingam; James Kinross; Jessica Evans; Ian Bloom Journal: Int J Surg Date: 2011-07-27 Impact factor: 6.071
Authors: Adrianne L Myers; Regan F Williams; Kim Giles; Teresa M Waters; James W Eubanks; S Douglas Hixson; Eunice Y Huang; Max R Langham; Martin L Blakely Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Gezzer Ortega; Daniel S Rhee; Dominic J Papandria; Jessica Yang; Andrew M Ibrahim; Andrew D Shore; Martin A Makary; Fizan Abdullah Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2011-06-24 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Jeremy P Parcells; Joan P Mileski; Forrest T Gnagy; Adriane F Haragan; William J Mileski Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Dani Yardeni; Ronald B Hirschl; Robert A Drongowski; Daniel H Teitelbaum; James D Geiger; Arnold G Coran Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Franziska Köhler; Lena Reese; Carolin Kastner; Anne Hendricks; Sophie Müller; Johan F Lock; Christoph-Thomas Germer; Armin Wiegering Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-06-08
Authors: Salomone Di Saverio; Mauro Podda; Belinda De Simone; Marco Ceresoli; Goran Augustin; Alice Gori; Marja Boermeester; Massimo Sartelli; Federico Coccolini; Antonio Tarasconi; Nicola De' Angelis; Dieter G Weber; Matti Tolonen; Arianna Birindelli; Walter Biffl; Ernest E Moore; Michael Kelly; Kjetil Soreide; Jeffry Kashuk; Richard Ten Broek; Carlos Augusto Gomes; Michael Sugrue; Richard Justin Davies; Dimitrios Damaskos; Ari Leppäniemi; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Andrew B Peitzman; Gustavo P Fraga; Ronald V Maier; Raul Coimbra; Massimo Chiarugi; Gabriele Sganga; Adolfo Pisanu; Gian Luigi De' Angelis; Edward Tan; Harry Van Goor; Francesco Pata; Isidoro Di Carlo; Osvaldo Chiara; Andrey Litvin; Fabio C Campanile; Boris Sakakushev; Gia Tomadze; Zaza Demetrashvili; Rifat Latifi; Fakri Abu-Zidan; Oreste Romeo; Helmut Segovia-Lohse; Gianluca Baiocchi; David Costa; Sandro Rizoli; Zsolt J Balogh; Cino Bendinelli; Thomas Scalea; Rao Ivatury; George Velmahos; Roland Andersson; Yoram Kluger; Luca Ansaloni; Fausto Catena Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2020-04-15 Impact factor: 5.469