Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 10, pp 3106–3111 | Cite as

A New Method for Surgical Abdominal Mass Closure After Abdominal Fascial Dehiscence Using Nasogastric Tube and Hemovac Perforator: A Case-Series Study

  • Jalal Vahedian
  • Sepideh Jahanian
  • Behrouz Banivaheb
  • Nima Hemmati
  • Mehrnaz Ghavamipour
  • Majid Chegini
  • Mahdi Alemrajabi
Original Scientific Report
  • 165 Downloads

Abstract

Background

As the challenge for finding the best abdominal incision closure technique continues, surgeons are aiming to minimize postoperative wound complications such as wound dehiscence and hernia as an acute or late manifestation. In order to achieve this goal, several abdominal opening and closure techniques have been tried. In this article, we describe a method in which we used a nasogastric tube (NGT) in mass closure for patients with fascial dehiscence.

Methods

In this case-series study, a total number of 25 patients participated. All of the patients had abdominal dehiscence after a surgery and had to undergo for another. An NGT was used for abdominal closure. The patients were followed for a month and were examined for any signs and symptoms of fever, infection, pain, material expenses, closing time, and laboratory data. The data were analyzed using SPSS software V.22. Mean ± SD and frequencies were used for describing the variables.

Results

The mean NGT mass closure material expenses for each patient were 8400.00 ± 0.00 IRR (around 0.25 US dollars). The mean closure time after the operation was 13.08 ± 3.09 min. There was no evidence of infection among the patients as well as no other complications after the surgery in the 1-month study period.

Conclusion

Abdominal mass closure with NG tube suturing technique is associated with reduced time required for closure of the incision, incidence of wound dehiscence, and the incidence of incisional hernia as well as infection, with a considerable low cost.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research has been granted by the research department of Iran University of Medical Sciences.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Webster C, Neumayer L, Smout R, Horn S, Daley J, Henderson W et al (2003) Prognostic models of abdominal wound dehiscence after laparotomy. J Surg Res 109(2):130–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bloemen A, van Dooren P, Huizinga BF, Hoofwijk AG (2011) Randomized clinical trial comparing polypropylene or polydioxanone for midline abdominal wall closure. Br J Surg 98(5):633–639CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kenig J, Richter P, Lasek A, Zbierska K, Zurawska S (2014) The efficacy of risk scores for predicting abdominal wound dehiscence: a case-controlled validation study. BMC Surg 14:65CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim JJ, Liang MK, Subramanian A, Balentine CJ, Sansgiry S, Awad SS (2011) Predictors of relaparotomy after nontrauma emergency general surgery with initial fascial closure. Am J Surg 202(5):549–552CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marwah S, Marwah N, Singh M, Kapoor A, Karwasra RK (2005) Addition of rectus sheath relaxation incisions to emergency midline laparotomy for peritonitis to prevent fascial dehiscence. World J Surg 29(2):235–239.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-004-7538-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    van Ramshorst GH, Eker HH, van der Voet JA, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2013) Long-term outcome study in patients with abdominal wound dehiscence: a comparative study on quality of life, body image, and incisional hernia. J Gastrointest Surg 17(8):1477–1484CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yılmaz KB, Akıncı M, Doğan L, Karaman N, Özaslan C, Atalay C (2013) A prospective evaluation of the risk factors for development of wound dehiscence and incisional hernia. Turk J Surg 29(1):25–30Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Riou JP, Cohen JR, Johnson H Jr (1992) Factors influencing wound dehiscence. Am J Surg 163(3):324–330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van’t Riet M, Steyerberg EW, Nellensteyn J, Bonjer HJ, Jeekel J (2002) Meta-analysis of techniques for closure of midline abdominal incisions. Br J Surg 89(11):1350–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seiler CM, Bruckner T, Diener MK, Papyan A, Golcher H, Seidlmayer C et al (2009) Interrupted or continuous slowly absorbable sutures for closure of primary elective midline abdominal incisions: a multicenter randomized trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541). Ann Surg 249(4):576–582CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gislason H, Viste A (1999) Closure of burst abdomen after major gastrointestinal operations–comparison of different surgical techniques and later development of incisional hernia. Eur J Surg 165(10):958–961CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diener MK, Voss S, Jensen K, Buchler MW, Seiler CM (2010) Elective midline laparotomy closure: the INLINE systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 251(5):843–856CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chawla S (2012) A comparison between mass closure and layered closure of midline abdominal incisions. Med J Dr DY Patil Univ 5(1):26–27Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chalya PL, Massinde AN, Kihunrwa A, Mabula JB (2015) Abdominal fascia closure following elective midline laparotomy: a surgical experience at a tertiary care hospital in Tanzania. BMC research notes 8Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Srivastava A, Roy S, Sahay K, Seenu V, Kumar A, Chumber S et al (2004) Prevention of burst abdominal wound by a new technique: a randomized trial comparing continuous versus interrupted X-suture. Indian J Surg 66(1):19Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koniaris LG, Hendrickson RJ, Drugas G, Abt P, Schoeniger LO (2001) Dynamic retention: a technique for closure of the complex abdomen in critically ill patients. Arch Surg (Chicago, Ill: 1960) 136(12):1359–1362 (discussion 63) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gäddnäs F, Saarnio J, Ala-Kokko T, Laurila J, Koivukangas V (2007) Continuous retention suture for the management of open abdomen: a high rate of delayed fascial closure. Scand J Surg 96(4):301–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gupta H, Srivastava A, Menon GR, Agrawal CS, Chumber S, Kumar S (2008) Comparison of interrupted versus continuous closure in abdominal wound repair: a meta-analysis of 23 trials. Asian J Surg 31(3):104–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aminpour M, Alamrajabi M, Movahhed M, Fereshtehnejad S (2009) Report of a case of open abdomen using zipper locked method. Razi J Med Sci 16(62):53–58Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seiler CM, Bruckner T, Diener MK, Papyan A, Golcher H, Seidlmayer C et al (2009) Interrupted or continuous slowly absorbable sutures for closure of primary elective midline abdominal incisions: a multicenter randomized trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541). Ann Surg 249(4):576–582CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ceydeli A, Rucinski J, Wise L (2005) Finding the best abdominal closure: an evidence-based review of the literature. Curr Surg 62(2):220–225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Komba CO (2012) Practices of abdominal fascial closure and related complications following elective midline laparotomy at Muhimbili National Hospital: Muhimbili University of Health and Allied SciencesGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anderson ER, Gates S (2007) Techniques and materials for closure of the abdominal wall in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004(4):CD004663.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004663.pub2
  24. 24.
    Bucknall T, Teare L, Ellis H (1983) The choice of a suture to close abdominal incisions. Eur Surg Res 15(2):59–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Osterberg B (1982) Enclosure of bacteria within capillary multifilament sutures as protection against leukocytes. Acta Chir Scand 149(7):663–668Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jalal Vahedian
    • 1
  • Sepideh Jahanian
    • 2
  • Behrouz Banivaheb
    • 2
  • Nima Hemmati
    • 2
  • Mehrnaz Ghavamipour
    • 2
  • Majid Chegini
    • 3
  • Mahdi Alemrajabi
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Firoozgar HospitalIran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  2. 2.Student Research Committee, School of MedicineIran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
  3. 3.Firoozgar Clinical Research Development Center (FCRDC)Iran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran

Personalised recommendations