Surgical neurology international · 2022
Variability in wound closure technique in midline posterior lumbar fusion surgery. International survey and standardized closure technique proposal.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aguilar Oscar Josue Montes, Sida Karmen Karina Alaniz, Betancourt Leonardo Álvarez, Olvera Manuel Dufoo, Bernaldez Guillermo Ivan Ladewig, López Ramón López, Oropeza Edith Oropeza, Ornelas Héctor Alonso Tirado
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Surgical wound complications represent an important risk factor, particularly in multilevel lumbar fusions. However, the literature regarding optimal wound closure techniques for these procedures is limited.
METHODS: We performed an online survey of 61 spinal surgeons from 11 countries, involving 25 different hospitals. The study included 26 neurosurgeons, 21 orthopedists, and 14 residents (Neurosurgery - 6 and orthopedics 8). The survey contained 17 questions on demographic information, closure techniques, and the use of drainage in posterior lumbar fusion surgery. We then developed a "consensus technique."
RESULTS: The proposed standardized closure techniques included: (1) using subfascial gravity drainage (i.e., without suction) with drain removal for <50 ml/day or a maximum duration of 48 h, (2) paraspinal muscle, fascia, and supraspinous ligament closure using interrupted-X stitches 0 or 1 Vicryl or other longer-lasting resorbable suture (i.e., polydioxanone suture), (3) closure of subcutaneous tissue with interrupted inverted Vicryl 2-0 sutures in two planes for subcutaneous tissue greater >25 mm in depth, and (4) skin closure with simple interrupted nylon 3-0 sutures.
CONCLUSION: There is great variability between closure techniques utilized for multilevel posterior lumbar fusion surgery. Here, we have described various standardized/evidence-based proven techniques for the closure of these wounds.
METHODS: We performed an online survey of 61 spinal surgeons from 11 countries, involving 25 different hospitals. The study included 26 neurosurgeons, 21 orthopedists, and 14 residents (Neurosurgery - 6 and orthopedics 8). The survey contained 17 questions on demographic information, closure techniques, and the use of drainage in posterior lumbar fusion surgery. We then developed a "consensus technique."
RESULTS: The proposed standardized closure techniques included: (1) using subfascial gravity drainage (i.e., without suction) with drain removal for <50 ml/day or a maximum duration of 48 h, (2) paraspinal muscle, fascia, and supraspinous ligament closure using interrupted-X stitches 0 or 1 Vicryl or other longer-lasting resorbable suture (i.e., polydioxanone suture), (3) closure of subcutaneous tissue with interrupted inverted Vicryl 2-0 sutures in two planes for subcutaneous tissue greater >25 mm in depth, and (4) skin closure with simple interrupted nylon 3-0 sutures.
CONCLUSION: There is great variability between closure techniques utilized for multilevel posterior lumbar fusion surgery. Here, we have described various standardized/evidence-based proven techniques for the closure of these wounds.