The Journal of surgical research · 2024
Open or Closed? Management of Skin Incisions After Emergency General Surgery Laparotomies.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Srinivas Shruthi, Coleman Julia R, Baselice Holly, Scarlet Sara, Tracy Brett M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We sought to determine if there was a relationship between skin management and surgical site infections (SSIs) among patients undergoing a laparotomy for emergency general surgery (EGS). We hypothesize that skin closure technique is not associated with SSI.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of adult patients (>18 y) who underwent an exploratory laparotomy for EGS conditions within 6 h of surgical consultation from 2015 to 2019. Patients whose fascia was not closed during the index operation were excluded. Patients were divided into groups: open skin (OS) and closed skin (CS). OS included negative pressure wound therapy or wet-to-dry gauze; CS included closure with staples or sutures. Our primary outcome was the rate of SSI.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised 388 patients: 42.3% OS (n = 164) and 57.7% CS (n = 224). The OS group had greater rates of systemic inflammatory response syndrome [SIRS] (54.9% versus 27.7%, P < 0.0001), hollow viscus perforation [HVP] (71.3% versus 20.5%, P < 0.0001), and peritoneal drains (51.2% versus 17.9%, P < 0.0001). Rates of OS management increased as wound class severity increased (0% [I] versus 12.2% [II] versus 15.9% [III] versus 72% [IV], P < 0.0001). The SSI rate for the cohort was 3.6% (n = 14); there was no difference in SSI rates (2.7% versus 4.9%, P = 0.3) between the CS or OS groups. Median length of stay was longer for the OS group (10 d versus 6.5 d, P < 0.0001). Independent predictors of OS management were SIRS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.93, P = 0.04), HVP (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.09-3.8, P = 0.03), and class III/IV wounds (aOR 8.65, 95% CI 4.43-16.89, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: OS management occurs more often in patients with SIRS, HVP, and dirty wounds after EGS laparotomies. However, we found no difference in SSI between groups, suggesting that skin closure can be considered in contaminated or dirty wounds.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of adult patients (>18 y) who underwent an exploratory laparotomy for EGS conditions within 6 h of surgical consultation from 2015 to 2019. Patients whose fascia was not closed during the index operation were excluded. Patients were divided into groups: open skin (OS) and closed skin (CS). OS included negative pressure wound therapy or wet-to-dry gauze; CS included closure with staples or sutures. Our primary outcome was the rate of SSI.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised 388 patients: 42.3% OS (n = 164) and 57.7% CS (n = 224). The OS group had greater rates of systemic inflammatory response syndrome [SIRS] (54.9% versus 27.7%, P < 0.0001), hollow viscus perforation [HVP] (71.3% versus 20.5%, P < 0.0001), and peritoneal drains (51.2% versus 17.9%, P < 0.0001). Rates of OS management increased as wound class severity increased (0% [I] versus 12.2% [II] versus 15.9% [III] versus 72% [IV], P < 0.0001). The SSI rate for the cohort was 3.6% (n = 14); there was no difference in SSI rates (2.7% versus 4.9%, P = 0.3) between the CS or OS groups. Median length of stay was longer for the OS group (10 d versus 6.5 d, P < 0.0001). Independent predictors of OS management were SIRS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.93, P = 0.04), HVP (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.09-3.8, P = 0.03), and class III/IV wounds (aOR 8.65, 95% CI 4.43-16.89, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: OS management occurs more often in patients with SIRS, HVP, and dirty wounds after EGS laparotomies. However, we found no difference in SSI between groups, suggesting that skin closure can be considered in contaminated or dirty wounds.