User login
LAS VEGAS – compared with staples, in a single-site, retrospective study.
For women whose skin incisions were closed with knotless sutures, mean surgical time was 38 minutes; for women who received a staple closure, mean surgical time was 44 minutes (P less than .001). Also, fewer women whose incisions were closed with knotless sutures experienced surgical bleeding greater than 1,000 mL, compared with those who received staples (0.3% vs. 3.0%; P less than .001).
Two previous randomized, controlled trials comparing knotless sutures with staples for skin closure after cesarean delivery were small and had methodological limitations, Inna Bleicher, MD, said in an interview during a poster session at the meeting sponsored by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.
Dr. Bleicher and her colleagues reviewed records from 2,173 elective cesarean deliveries over a period of 4 years. Absorbable, antibacterial, knotless sutures were used for closure for 1,172 women, while staples were used for the remaining 1,001 women.
Over the study period, Dr. Bleicher noted that there was a gradual transition from the use of staples to absorbable, knotless sutures, which also were increasingly used for the hysterotomy closure. She added that, in conversation with peers at Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel, where she practices as an ob.gyn, she’s found that physicians find the sutures easy and quick to use, because the sutures are double ended, allowing the possibility for two operators to work together in wound closure.
The study’s primary outcome measure was the rate of postoperative infection, defined as postoperative white blood count greater than 18,000 per microliter and antimicrobial treatment. Secondary outcome measures included C-reactive protein levels, hospital readmission for infection related to the delivery, duration of surgery, and surgical blood loss estimated at 1,000 mL or more.
A higher proportion of women in the staple closure group than the knotless suture group required postsurgical antibiotic treatment (11% vs. 10%), but this difference didn’t reach statistical significance (P = .243).
There were no significant differences in the groups in terms of maternal age (about 32 years), or gestational age at delivery (about 39 weeks).
“Our results suggest that cesarean scar skin closure with antibacterial knotless sutures did not increase, and may even reduce, the rates of postoperative infection, morbidity, surgical blood loss, and may shorten operation time,” wrote Dr. Bleicher and her colleagues.
Dr. Bleicher reported no outside sources of funding and no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Bleicher I et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan. 220;1:S622, Abstract 966.
LAS VEGAS – compared with staples, in a single-site, retrospective study.
For women whose skin incisions were closed with knotless sutures, mean surgical time was 38 minutes; for women who received a staple closure, mean surgical time was 44 minutes (P less than .001). Also, fewer women whose incisions were closed with knotless sutures experienced surgical bleeding greater than 1,000 mL, compared with those who received staples (0.3% vs. 3.0%; P less than .001).
Two previous randomized, controlled trials comparing knotless sutures with staples for skin closure after cesarean delivery were small and had methodological limitations, Inna Bleicher, MD, said in an interview during a poster session at the meeting sponsored by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.
Dr. Bleicher and her colleagues reviewed records from 2,173 elective cesarean deliveries over a period of 4 years. Absorbable, antibacterial, knotless sutures were used for closure for 1,172 women, while staples were used for the remaining 1,001 women.
Over the study period, Dr. Bleicher noted that there was a gradual transition from the use of staples to absorbable, knotless sutures, which also were increasingly used for the hysterotomy closure. She added that, in conversation with peers at Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel, where she practices as an ob.gyn, she’s found that physicians find the sutures easy and quick to use, because the sutures are double ended, allowing the possibility for two operators to work together in wound closure.
The study’s primary outcome measure was the rate of postoperative infection, defined as postoperative white blood count greater than 18,000 per microliter and antimicrobial treatment. Secondary outcome measures included C-reactive protein levels, hospital readmission for infection related to the delivery, duration of surgery, and surgical blood loss estimated at 1,000 mL or more.
A higher proportion of women in the staple closure group than the knotless suture group required postsurgical antibiotic treatment (11% vs. 10%), but this difference didn’t reach statistical significance (P = .243).
There were no significant differences in the groups in terms of maternal age (about 32 years), or gestational age at delivery (about 39 weeks).
“Our results suggest that cesarean scar skin closure with antibacterial knotless sutures did not increase, and may even reduce, the rates of postoperative infection, morbidity, surgical blood loss, and may shorten operation time,” wrote Dr. Bleicher and her colleagues.
Dr. Bleicher reported no outside sources of funding and no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Bleicher I et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan. 220;1:S622, Abstract 966.
LAS VEGAS – compared with staples, in a single-site, retrospective study.
For women whose skin incisions were closed with knotless sutures, mean surgical time was 38 minutes; for women who received a staple closure, mean surgical time was 44 minutes (P less than .001). Also, fewer women whose incisions were closed with knotless sutures experienced surgical bleeding greater than 1,000 mL, compared with those who received staples (0.3% vs. 3.0%; P less than .001).
Two previous randomized, controlled trials comparing knotless sutures with staples for skin closure after cesarean delivery were small and had methodological limitations, Inna Bleicher, MD, said in an interview during a poster session at the meeting sponsored by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.
Dr. Bleicher and her colleagues reviewed records from 2,173 elective cesarean deliveries over a period of 4 years. Absorbable, antibacterial, knotless sutures were used for closure for 1,172 women, while staples were used for the remaining 1,001 women.
Over the study period, Dr. Bleicher noted that there was a gradual transition from the use of staples to absorbable, knotless sutures, which also were increasingly used for the hysterotomy closure. She added that, in conversation with peers at Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel, where she practices as an ob.gyn, she’s found that physicians find the sutures easy and quick to use, because the sutures are double ended, allowing the possibility for two operators to work together in wound closure.
The study’s primary outcome measure was the rate of postoperative infection, defined as postoperative white blood count greater than 18,000 per microliter and antimicrobial treatment. Secondary outcome measures included C-reactive protein levels, hospital readmission for infection related to the delivery, duration of surgery, and surgical blood loss estimated at 1,000 mL or more.
A higher proportion of women in the staple closure group than the knotless suture group required postsurgical antibiotic treatment (11% vs. 10%), but this difference didn’t reach statistical significance (P = .243).
There were no significant differences in the groups in terms of maternal age (about 32 years), or gestational age at delivery (about 39 weeks).
“Our results suggest that cesarean scar skin closure with antibacterial knotless sutures did not increase, and may even reduce, the rates of postoperative infection, morbidity, surgical blood loss, and may shorten operation time,” wrote Dr. Bleicher and her colleagues.
Dr. Bleicher reported no outside sources of funding and no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Bleicher I et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan. 220;1:S622, Abstract 966.
REPORTING FROM THE PREGNANCY MEETING