DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20204678

Prospective comparative study of modified Smead Jones versus conventional continuous method of fascial closure in emergency midline laparotomy

Chirag B. Aghara, Ajay M. Rajyaguru, Jatin G. Bhatt

Abstract


Background: A midline incision is simple, quick, bloodless and provides excellent exposure. So it is most commonly used access route for emergency laparotomy. But compare to other incision it increases incidence of postoperative wound dehiscence and an incisional hernia. Prevention of this complication is important in reducing post-operative morbidity and mortality. Present study was undertaken to compare the effectiveness of modified Smead Jones versus conventional continuous closure technique in terms of wound infection and wound dehiscence.

Methods: A total of 100 patients from July 2017 to November 2019 were randomized in two groups of 50 each. Group A in which linea alba closure was done by modified Smead Jones technique and group B in which linea alba closure was done by conventional continuous closure technique.

Results: 12 patients in group A and 28 patients in group B developed wound infection and 1 patient in group A and 7 patients in group B developed wound dehiscence.

Conclusions: Modified Smead Jones technique is better than conventional continuous closure technique in management of closure of emergency midline laparotomy.

 


Keywords


Continuous closure, Emergency midline laparotomy, Modified Smead Jones technique, Wound dehiscence

Full Text:

PDF

References


Sringeri R, Vasudeviah T. Comparison of conventional closure versus “re-modified Smead Jones” technique of single layer mass closure with Polypropylene (prolene) loop suture after midline laparotomy in emergency cases. Int Surg J. 2017;4:3058-61.

Ahi KS, Khandekar SM, Mittal SK, Chaudhary V, Sharma A, Jain A, et al. Prevention of burst abdomen by interrupted closure: a comparative study of conventional continuous versus interrupted-X-type versus hughes far-and-near interrupted abdominal fascial closure in surgical patients. ISOR J. 2017;16:21-30.

Agrawal CS, Tiwari P, Mishra S, Rao A, Hadke NS, Adhikari S, et al. Interrupted abdominal closure prevents burst: randomized controlled trial comparing interrupted-X and conventional continuous closures in surgical and gynecological patients. Indian J Surg. 2014;76(4):270-6.

Dhamnaskar SS, Sawarkar PC, Vijayakumaran P, Mandal S. Comparative study of efficacy of modified continuous Smead-Jones versus interrupted method of midline laparotomy fascial closure for contaminated cases. Int Surg J. 2016;3:1751-6.

Richards PC, Balch CM, Aldrete JS. Abdominal wound closure. A randomized prospective study of 571 patients comparing continuous vs. interrupted suture techniques. Ann Surg. 1983;197:238-43.

Fagniez PL, Hay JM, Lacàine F, Thomsen C. Abdominal midline incision closure. A multicentric randomized prospective trial of 3,135 patients, comparing continuous versus interrupted polyglycolic acid sutures. Arch Surg. 1985;120:1351-3.

Murtaza B, Khan NA, Sharif MA. Modified midline abdominal wound closure technique in complicated/ high risk laparotomies. J Coll Phys Surg Pak. 2010;20(1):37-41.

Malik AR, Scott NA. Double near and far prolene suture closure: a technique for abdominal wall closure after laparotomy. Br J Surg. 2001;88(1):146-7.

Roses RE, Morris JB. Incisions, closures and management of abdominal wound. In: Zinner MJ, Ashley SW,Hines OJ, eds. Maingot’s abdominal operations. 12th Edn. The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc; 2012:99-120.

Hughes LE. Incisional hernia. Asian J Surg. 1990;13(2):69.

Spiliotis J, Tsiveriotis K, Datsis AD, Vaxevanidou A, Zacharis G. Wound dehiscence is still a problem in the 21th century: a retrospective study. World J Emerg Surg. 2009;4:12.

O’Dwyer PJ, Courtrey CA. Educational review: Factors involved in abdominal wall closure and subsequent incisional hernia. Surgeon. 2003;1(1):17-22.

Gislason H, Gronbech JE, Soreide O. Burst abdomen and incisional hernia after major gastrointestinal operations-comparison of three closure techniques. Eur J Surg. 1995;161:349-54.

Riou JP, Cohen JR, Johnson H. Factors influencing wound dehiscence. Am J Surg. 1992;163:324-30.

Sørensen LT, Hemmingsen U, Kallehave F, Wille-Jørgensen P, Kjærgaard J, Møller LN, et al. Risk factors for tissue and wound complications in gastrointestinal surgery. Ann Surg. 2005;241(4):654.