Comparison of surgical techniques for stoma closure: A retrospective study of purse-string skin closure versus conventional skin closure following ileostomy and colostomy reversal

  • WADA Y
  • MIYOSHI N
  • OHUE M
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of postoperative complications, including superficial incisional surgical site infection (SSI) following purse-string skin closure (PS) and conventional skin closure with a drainage tube (CD) following stoma closure. A total of 55 consecutive patients who underwent loop colostomy and loop ileostomy closures in our hospital between October, 2011 and September, 2014 were retrospectively assessed. The patients were divided into two groups, namely the PS group (26 patients) and the CD group (29 patients). There were no significant differences in the characteristics of the patients between the two groups. The baseline and operative characteristics also did not differ significantly between the two groups. However the incidence of superficial incisional SSI was lower in the PS group compared to that in the CD group (0 vs. 13.8%, respectively; P=0.049). The overall incidence of complications did not differ significantly between the two groups (P=0.313). The duration of postoperative hospital stay in the PS group was shorter compared to that in the CD group. In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that PS may an effective technique to reduce the incidence of superficial incisional SSI. This technique appears to be superior to the conventional technique, allowing for better cosmesis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

WADA, Y., MIYOSHI, N., OHUE, M., NOURA, S., FUJINO, S., SUGIMURA, K., … YANO, M. (2015). Comparison of surgical techniques for stoma closure: A retrospective study of purse-string skin closure versus conventional skin closure following ileostomy and colostomy reversal. Molecular and Clinical Oncology, 3(3), 619–622. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2015.505

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free