Meta-analysis on Materials and Techniques for Laparotomy Closure: The MATCH Review

Overview

Journal World J Surg

Publisher Wiley

Specialty General Surgery

Date 2018 Jan 12

PMID 29322212

Citations 32

Authors

N A Henriksen

E B Deerenberg

L Venclauskas

R H Fortelny

M Miserez

F E Muysoms

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate closure materials and suture techniques for emergency and elective laparotomies. The primary outcome was incisional hernia after 12 months, and the secondary outcomes were burst abdomen and surgical site infection.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted until September 2017. The quality of the RCTs was evaluated by at least 3 assessors using critical appraisal checklists. Meta-analyses were performed.

Results: A total of 23 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. There was no evidence from RCTs using the same suture technique in both study arms that any suture material (fast-absorbable/slowly absorbable/non-absorbable) is superior in reducing incisional hernias. There is no evidence that continuous suturing is superior in reducing incisional hernias compared to interrupted suturing. When using a slowly absorbable suture for continuous suturing in elective midline closure, the small bites technique results in significantly less incisional hernias than a large bites technique (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19, 0.86).

Conclusions: There is no high-quality evidence available concerning the best suture material or technique to reduce incisional hernia rate when closing a laparotomy. When using a slowly absorbable suture and a continuous suturing technique with small tissue bites, the incisional hernia rate is significantly reduced compared with a large bites technique.

Citing Articles

Does randomised evidence alter clinical practise? The react qualitative study.

Lawday S, Mattick K, Bethune R BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24(1):862.

PMID: 39075560 PMC: 11287829. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-11305-4.

Superiority trial for the development of an ideal method for the closure of midline abdominal wall incisions to reduce the incidence of wound complications after elective gastroenterological surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Fukai S, Mizusawa Y, Noda H, Tsujinaka S, Maeda Y, Hasebe R Trials. 2024; 25(1):327.

PMID: 38760769 PMC: 11100179. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08167-w.

The Best Closure Technique Without Mesh in Elective Midline Laparotomy Closure.

Fortelny R J Abdom Wall Surg. 2024; 1:10962.

PMID: 38314158 PMC: 10831662. DOI: 10.3389/jaws.2022.10962.

Defining High-Risk Patients Suitable for Incisional Hernia Prevention.

Pereira-Rodriguez J, Bravo-Salva A, Argudo-Aguirre N, Amador-Gil S, Pera-Roman M J Abdom Wall Surg. 2024; 2:10899.

PMID: 38312422 PMC: 10831640. DOI: 10.3389/jaws.2023.10899.

The enigma of incisional hernia prediction unraveled: external validation of a prognostic model in colorectal cancer patients.

Amro C, Smith L, Shulkin J, McGraw J, Hill N, Broach R Hernia. 2024; 28(2):547-553.

PMID: 38227093 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-023-02947-0.

References

Osther P, Gjode P, Mortensen B, Mortensen P, Bartholin J, Gottrup F . Randomized comparison of polyglycolic acid and polyglyconate sutures for abdominal fascial closure after laparotomy in patients with suspected impaired wound healing. Br J Surg. 1995; 82(8):1080-2. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800820824. View

Krukowski Z, Cusick E, Engeset J, MATHESON N . Polydioxanone or polypropylene for closure of midline abdominal incisions: a prospective comparative clinical trial. Br J Surg. 1987; 74(9):828-30. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800740927. View

Richards P, Balch C, ALDRETE J . Abdominal wound closure. A randomized prospective study of 571 patients comparing continuous vs. interrupted suture techniques. Ann Surg. 1983; 197(2):238-43. PMC: 1353115. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-198302000-00018. View

Gislason H, Gronbech J, Soreide O . Burst abdomen and incisional hernia after major gastrointestinal operations--comparison of three closure techniques. Eur J Surg. 1995; 161(5):349-54. View

Cameron A, Parker C, Field E, Gray R, Wyatt A . A randomised comparison of polydioxanone (PDS) and polypropylene (Prolene) for abdominal wound closure. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1987; 69(3):113-5. PMC: 2498486. View

Bresler L, Courbey P, Feldman L, BILWEISS J, Tortuyaux J, Rauch P . [Results of a controlled trial comparing 3 suture threads at slow resorption for the closure of supra-umbilical midline laparotomies]. Ann Chir. 1995; 49(6):544-8. View

Bloemen A, Van Dooren P, Huizinga B, Hoofwijk A . Randomized clinical trial comparing polypropylene or polydioxanone for midline abdominal wall closure. Br J Surg. 2011; 98(5):633-9. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.7398. View

Sorensen L, Hemmingsen U, Kirkeby L, Kallehave F, Jorgensen L . Smoking is a risk factor for incisional hernia. Arch Surg. 2005; 140(2):119-23. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.140.2.119. View

van Ramshorst G, Eker H, Hop W, Jeekel J, Lange J . Impact of incisional hernia on health-related quality of life and body image: a prospective cohort study. Am J Surg. 2012; 204(2):144-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.01.012. View

10.

Deerenberg E, Harlaar J, Steyerberg E, Lont H, van Doorn H, Heisterkamp J . Small bites versus large bites for closure of abdominal midline incisions (STITCH): a double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015; 386(10000):1254-1260. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60459-7. View

11.

Alnassar S, Bawahab M, Abdoh A, Guzman R, Al Tuwaijiri T, Louridas G . Incisional hernia postrepair of abdominal aortic occlusive and aneurysmal disease: five-year incidence. Vascular. 2012; 20(5):273-7. DOI: 10.1258/vasc.2011.oa0332. View

12.

Wissing J, van Vroonhoven T, Schattenkerk M, Veen H, PONSEN R, Jeekel J . Fascia closure after midline laparotomy: results of a randomized trial. Br J Surg. 1987; 74(8):738-41. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800740831. View

13.

Agrawal V, Sharma N, Joshi M, Minocha V . Role of suture material and technique of closure in wound outcome following laparotomy for peritonitis. Trop Gastroenterol. 2010; 30(4):237-40. View

14.

Deitel M, Alhindawi R, Yamen M, To T, Burul C . Dexon plus versus Maxon fascial closure in morbid obesity: a prospective randomized comparison. Can J Surg. 1990; 33(4):302-4. View

15.

Seiler C, Bruckner T, Diener M, Papyan A, Golcher H, Seidlmayer C . Interrupted or continuous slowly absorbable sutures for closure of primary elective midline abdominal incisions: a multicenter randomized trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541). Ann Surg. 2009; 249(4):576-82. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819ec6c8. View

16.

Velnar T, Bailey T, Smrkolj V . The wound healing process: an overview of the cellular and molecular mechanisms. J Int Med Res. 2009; 37(5):1528-42. DOI: 10.1177/147323000903700531. View

17.

Gillion J, Sanders D, Miserez M, Muysoms F . The economic burden of incisional ventral hernia repair: a multicentric cost analysis. Hernia. 2016; 20(6):819-830. DOI: 10.1007/s10029-016-1480-z. View

18.

Rahbari N, Knebel P, Kieser M, Bruckner T, Bartsch D, Friess H . Design and current status of CONTINT: continuous versus interrupted abdominal wall closure after emergency midline laparotomy - a randomized controlled multicenter trial [NCT00544583]. Trials. 2012; 13:72. PMC: 3536720. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-72. View

19.

Gurjar V, Halvadia B, Bharaney R, Ajwani V, Shah S, Rai S . Study of two techniques for midline laparotomy fascial wound closure. Indian J Surg. 2014; 76(2):91-4. PMC: 4039690. DOI: 10.1007/s12262-012-0612-7. View

20.

Bourne R, Bitar H, Andreae P, Martin L, Finlay J, Marquis F . In-vivo comparison of four absorbable sutures: Vicryl, Dexon Plus, Maxon and PDS. Can J Surg. 1988; 31(1):43-5. View