Feasibility and Safety of Absorbable Knotless Wound Closure Device in Laparoscopic Myomectomy

Overview

Journal Biomed Res Int

Publisher Wiley

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Biotechnology
General Medicine

Date 2016 Jul 19

PMID 27429977

Citations 4

Authors

Chying-Chyuan Chan

Ching-Yu Lee

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose. Myomectomy has been performed through laparoscopy. Suturing is known as rate-limiting step in laparoscopic myomectomy. The present study was aimed at comparing the clinical outcomes of absorbable knotless wound closure device with the results of conventional suturing. Methods. This prospective study included 62 women who underwent laparoscopic myomectomy at Taipei City Hospital, Zhongxiao Branch, from January 2010 through to August 2012. The patients were randomized into two groups according to suturing materials, the knotless group and the 2-0 Vicryl suture group. Patient demographics, overall operative time, and intraoperative blood loss were compared between two groups. Results. Demographic characteristics and laboratory variables before surgery were comparable. Operative time was significantly shorter in knotless group compared with that in 2-0 Vicryl suture group (112 ± 47 versus 147 ± 63 minutes; p < 0.05). The results revealed a significant difference in intraoperative blood loss between two groups (knotless versus 2-0 Vicryl: 112.8 ± 54.2 versus 143.6 ± 64.9). Use of absorbable knotless wound closure device was associated with greater hemostasis compared with that of 2-0 Vicryl. During a 2-year follow-up period, 12 patients (46.2%) from the group with absorbable knotless wound closure device and 14 patients (38.9%) from 2-0 Vicryl suture group became pregnant. Conclusion. Closure of myometrium using absorbable knotless wound closure device after laparoscopic myomectomy resulted in a shorter operative time and less blood loss.

Citing Articles

Comparison of efficacy of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic treatment for uterine leiomyoma: a latest meta-analysis.

Li Y, Liu R, Li X Front Oncol. 2023; 13:1192582.

PMID: 37601692 PMC: 10433900. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1192582.

Surgical benefits of bidirectional knotless barbed sutures over conventional sutures for uterine repair during cesarean section-A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Deedwania P, Singh A, Patel T Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2022; 19(1):51-59.

PMID: 35343220 PMC: 8966326. DOI: 10.4274/tjod.galenos.2021.93395.

An analysis of the surgical outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy and multi-port laparoscopic myomectomy.

Zhou S, Wang H, Wang K Ann Transl Med. 2021; 9(11):927.

PMID: 34350242 PMC: 8263852. DOI: 10.21037/atm-21-1862.

The Effect on Performance Time and Quality of the Knots after Mono or Bimanual Training of Laparoscopic Intracorporeal Knot Tying according to the Gladiator Rule Technique.

Asencio F, Ribeiro H, Romeo A, Wattiez A, Ribeiro P Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2018; 40(5):266-274.

PMID: 29775972 PMC: 10309443. DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1649494.

References

Burchett M, Mattar S, McKenna D . Iatrogenic intestinal and mesenteric injuries with small bowel volvulus following use of barbed suture during laparoscopic myomectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013; 23(7):632-4. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2013.0065. View

Kumakiri J, Takeuchi H, Kitade M, Kikuchi I, Shimanuki H, Itoh S . Pregnancy and delivery after laparoscopic myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005; 12(3):241-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2005.03.011. View

Ardovino M, Castaldi M, Fraternali F, Ardovino I, Colacurci N, Signoriello G . Bidirectional barbed suture in laparoscopic myomectomy: clinical features. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013; 23(12):1006-10. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2013.0103. View

Alessandri F, Remorgida V, Venturini P, Ferrero S . Unidirectional barbed suture versus continuous suture with intracorporeal knots in laparoscopic myomectomy: a randomized study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010; 17(6):725-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.06.007. View

Akinyemi B, Adewoye B, Fakoya T . Uterine fibroid: a review. Niger J Med. 2004; 13(4):318-29. View

Buckley V, Nesbitt-Hawes E, Atkinson P, Won H, Deans R, Burton A . Laparoscopic myomectomy: clinical outcomes and comparative evidence. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014; 22(1):11-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.08.007. View

van der Kooij S, Ankum W, Hehenkamp W . Review of nonsurgical/minimally invasive treatments for uterine fibroids. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 24(6):368-75. DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e328359f10a. View

Pritts E . Fibroids and infertility: a systematic review of the evidence. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001; 56(8):483-91. DOI: 10.1097/00006254-200108000-00022. View

Angioli R, Plotti F, Montera R, Damiani P, Terranova C, Oronzi I . A new type of absorbable barbed suture for use in laparoscopic myomectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012; 117(3):220-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.12.023. View

10.

Parker W, Einarsson J, Istre O, Dubuisson J . Risk factors for uterine rupture after laparoscopic myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010; 17(5):551-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.04.015. View

11.

Chen I, Motan T, Kiddoo D . Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist in laparoscopic myomectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011; 18(3):303-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2011.02.010. View

12.

Einarsson J, Chavan N, Suzuki Y, Jonsdottir G, Vellinga T, Greenberg J . Use of bidirectional barbed suture in laparoscopic myomectomy: evaluation of perioperative outcomes, safety, and efficacy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010; 18(1):92-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.10.003. View

13.

Einarsson J, Vellinga T, Twijnstra A, Chavan N, Suzuki Y, Greenberg J . Bidirectional barbed suture: an evaluation of safety and clinical outcomes. JSLS. 2011; 14(3):381-5. PMC: 3041035. DOI: 10.4293/108680810X12924466007566. View

14.

Levy B . Modern management of uterine fibroids. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008; 87(8):812-23. DOI: 10.1080/00016340802146912. View

15.

Aoki Y, Kikuchi I, Kumakiri J, Kitade M, Shinjo A, Ozaki R . Long unidirectional barbed suturing technique with extracorporeal traction in laparoscopic myomectomy. BMC Surg. 2014; 14:84. PMC: 4217315. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-14-84. View

16.

Vitale S, Tropea A, Rossetti D, Carnelli M, Cianci A . Management of uterine leiomyomas in pregnancy: review of literature. Updates Surg. 2013; 65(3):179-82. DOI: 10.1007/s13304-013-0198-z. View

17.

Greenberg J, Goldman R . Barbed suture: a review of the technology and clinical uses in obstetrics and gynecology. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 6(3-4):107-15. PMC: 4002186. View

18.

Bedient C, Magrina J, Noble B, Kho R . Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic myomectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 201(6):566.e1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.05.049. View

19.

Kumakiri J, Takeuchi H, Itoh S, Kitade M, Kikuchi I, Shimanuki H . Prospective evaluation for the feasibility and safety of vaginal birth after laparoscopic myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008; 15(4):420-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2008.04.008. View

20.

Amant F, Floquet A, Friedlander M, Kristensen G, Mahner S, Nam E . Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus review for endometrial stromal sarcoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014; 24(9 Suppl 3):S67-72. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000205. View