Comparative study of leg wound skin closure in coronary artery bypass graft operations. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair of incisional and primary ventral hernia: results of a prospective randomized study. A prospective study between two different techniques for the repair of a large recurrent ventral hernia: a double mesh intraperitoneal repair versus onlay mesh repair. Colporrhaphy compared with mesh or graft-reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. The Southmead perineal suture study. A randomized comparison of suture materials and suturing techniques for repair of perineal trauma. A randomized study comparing laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer using suture or sutureless technique. Tissue adhesive versus suture wound repair at 1 year: randomized clinical trial correlating early, 3-month, and 1-year cosmetic outcome. Vaginal repair with mesh versus colporrhaphy for prolapse: a randomised controlled trial.
A prospective randomised study of four different methods of leg wound skin closure after removal of the long saphenous vein was carried out in 113 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. These methods were: (1) continuous nylon vertical mattress suture (27 patients); (2) continuous subcuticular absorbable (Dexon) suture (29 patients); (3) metal skin staples (Autosuture) (27 patients); and (4) adhesive sutureless skin closure ("Op-site") (30 patients). All wounds were examined by two independent observers at five, 10, and 45 days after operation. At five days, inflammation, extent of oedema, discharge, and infection were assessed. At 10 days attention was paid to the state of wound healing and at 45 days to the final cosmetic appearance. The use of continuous subcuticular suture resulted in significantly less discharge than did the use of metal staples, nylon vertical mattress suture, or Op-site. The incidence of established wound infection was 4.5% overall, with no infection in the wounds closed with Dexon. Assessment of the healing process showed subcuticular Dexon to be more effective than metal staples or vertical mattress nylon suture. The final cosmetic result showed continuous subcuticular suture to be superior to nylon vertical mattress suture and skin staples but as effective as Op-site sutureless skin closure. The objective of this study was to determine the best treatment of incisional hernia, taking into account recurrence, complications, discomfort, cosmetic result, and patient satisfaction.
                Long-term results of incisional hernia repair are lacking. Retrospective studies and the midterm results of this study indicate that mesh repair is superior to suture repair. However, many surgeons are still performing suture repair.
                Between 1992 and 1998, a multicenter trial was performed, in which 181 eligible patients with a primary or first-time recurrent midline incisional hernia were randomly assigned to suture or mesh repair. In 2003, follow-up was updated.
                Median follow-up was 75 months for suture repair and 81 months for mesh repair patients. The 10-year cumulative rate of recurrence was 63% for suture repair and 32% for mesh repair (P < 0.001). Abdominal aneurysm (P = 0.01) and wound infection (P = 0.02) were identified as independent risk factors for recurrence. In patients with small incisional hernias, the recurrence rates were 67% after suture repair and 17% after mesh repair (P = 0.003). One hundred twenty-six patients completed long-term follow-up (median follow-up 98 months). In the mesh repair group, 17% suffered a complication, compared with 8% in the suture repair group (P = 0.17). Abdominal pain was more frequent in suture repair patients (P = 0.01), but there was no difference in scar pain, cosmetic result, and patient satisfaction.
                Mesh repair results in a lower recurrence rate and less abdominal pain and does not result in more complications than suture repair. Suture repair of incisional hernia should be abandoned. Incisional hernia is an important complication of abdominal surgery. Its repair has progressed from a primary suture repair to various mesh repairs and laparoscopic repair. Laparoscopic mesh repair is a promising alternative, and in the absence of consensus, needs prospective randomized controlled trials.
                Between April 2003 and April 2005, 66 patients with incisional, primary ventral and recurrent hernias were randomized to receive either open retro-rectus mesh repair or laparoscopic mesh repair. These patients were followed up at 1-, 3-, and 6-month intervals thereafter for a mean of 12.17 months (open repair group) and 13.73 months (laparoscopic repair group).
                Lower abdominal hernias after gynecologic operations constituted the majority of the hernias (approximately 50%) in both groups. There was no significant injury to viscera or vessel in either group and no conversions. The defect size was 42.12 cm in the open (group 1) and 65.66 cm2 in the laparoscopic group (group 2), and the prosthesis sizes were, respectively, 152.67 cm2 and 203.83 cm2. The hospital stay was 3.43 days in open group and 1.47 days in laparoscopic group (p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the pain scores between the two groups. More wound-related infectious complications occurred in the open group (33%) than in the laparoscopic group (6%) (p = 0.013). There was one recurrence in the open repair group (3%) and two recurrences in laparoscopic group (6%) (p = 0.55).
                Laparoscopic repair of incisional and ventral hernias is superior to open mesh repair in terms of significantly less blood loss, fewer complications, shorter hospital stay, and excellent cosmetic outcome. Massive ventral hernias are difficult to repair, especially with multiple recurrences. Numerous methods of repair have been described with an overall recurrence rate up to 33% after first repair and 44% after second repair, mostly occurring within 3 years of the repair.
                This is a prospective study on 41 patients who underwent surgery between January 2000 and August 2004 for recurrent large ventral hernias. Patients were randomized into two groups: group A included 22 patients, who were subjected to suture repair with an onlay polypropylene mesh, and group B, which included 19 patients, who were subjected to a tailored double mesh (Vicryl + polypropylene) intraperitoneal repair.
                Superficial wound infection occurred in two patients (4.8%), one in each group. By a median follow up of 30 months, seroma formation or hernia recurrence was not found in group B in comparison to seven and six cases, respectively, in group A (p < or = 0.000). There was no intraabdominal complication in the cases subjected to double mesh intraperitoneal repair due to the protective effect of the inner Vicryl layer, which is characterized by its low reactivity.
                A double mesh intraperitoneal repair (ADMIR) is successful for the repair of recurrent large ventral hernias as it is applicable to all sites of ventral hernias. The mesh is mostly hidden within the abdomen with relatively affordable pain allowing for early mobilization, the complication rate is low and so far no recurrence was reported. A long-term follow up with a larger number of cases is advisable in order to determine the long-term success of this kind of repair. To report 2-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing standard anterior colporrhaphy with reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair using xenograft or synthetic mesh in women with symptomatic anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
                Women with stage II or greater anterior prolapse were randomly assigned to three groups: anterior colporrhaphy, paravaginal repair with porcine dermis, or polypropylene mesh. Outcomes of prolapse stage, quality of life, degree of bother, and sexual symptoms were assessed by blinded examiners and validated measures at 2 years. Anatomic failure was defined as anterior prolapse at stage II or greater. Composite failure was defined as symptoms of "bulge" and anterior prolapse at stage II or greater. Power calculations determined 33 participants per arm would detect a 40% difference in anatomic success between standard and grafted repair. χ, Mann-Whitney U, and Student's t tests were used for comparisons.
                Of the 99 participants enrolled, 78 (79%) completed a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Those with mesh had a significantly lower anatomic failure rate (18%) than both the porcine (46%, P=.015) and colporrhaphy groups (58%, P=.002). All groups had statistically similar reductions in their prolapse and urinary symptom subscale scores. Composite failure was not statistically different between groups: 13% colporrhaphy, 12% porcine, and 4% mesh. Two reoperations for anterior prolapse occurred in the porcine group. Mesh erosion rates were 14% for the mesh group.
                Vaginal paravaginal repair with polypropylene mesh has the lowest anatomic failure rate when compared with that with xenograft and anterior colporrhaphy without differences in composite failures.
                ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT0139171.
                I. Commonly used suture materials and techniques for perineal repair following vaginal delivery were compared in a randomized controlled trial involving 1574 women. Three comparisons were made using a modified factorial design. In the comparison of teflon-coated polyglycolic acid (Dexon plus) with chromic catgut for repair of the vagina and deep perineal tissues there was no clear difference other than less short-term analgesia being required in association with polyglycolic acid. Outcome was also similar after skin repair with either polyglycolic acid or chromic catgut or silk, although silk repair required more packets of material and was associated with delay in resuming sexual intercourse; polyglycolic acid was more likely to need removal than chromic catgut but it appeared to reduce the need for resuturing. There was no clear difference between continuous subcuticular and interrupted transcutaneous sutures for repair of perineal skin. This study compares laparoscopic versus open repair and suture versus sutureless repair of perforated duodenal and juxtapyloric ulcers.
                The place of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer followed by peritoneal toilet of the peritoneal cavity has been established. Whether repair of the perforated peptic ulcer by the laparoscopic approach is better than conventional open repair and whether sutured repair is better than sutureless repair are both undetermined.
                One hundred three patients were randomly allocated to laparoscopic suture repair, laparoscopic sutureless repair, open suture repair, and open sutureless repair.
                Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (groups 1 and 2) took significantly longer than open repair (groups 3 and 4; 94.3 +/ 40.3 vs. 53.7 +/ 42.6 minutes: Student's test, p < 0.001), but the amount of analgesic required after laparoscopic repair was significantly less than in open surgery (median 1 dose vs. 3 doses) (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the four groups of patients in terms of duration of nasogastric aspiration, duration of intravenous drip, total hospital stay, time to resume normal diet, visual analogue scale score for pain in the first 24 hours after surgery, morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates.
                Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is a viable option. Sutureless repair is as safe as suture repair and it takes less time to perform. To compare the 1-year cosmetic outcome of wounds treated with octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and monofilament sutures and to correlate the early, 3-month, and 1-year cosmetic outcomes.
                We prospectively randomized 136 cases of traumatic laceration to repair with octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive or 5-0 or smaller monofilament suture. A wound score was assigned by a research nurse, and validated by a second nurse blinded to the treatment, at 5 to 10 days after injury (early), 3 months, and 1 year. Standardized photographs were taken at 3 months and 1 year and shown to a cosmetic surgeon blinded to the method of closure, who rated the wounds on a validated cosmesis scale.
                We were able to examine 77 lacerations at 1 year for follow-up. No differences were found in the demographic or clinical characteristics between groups. Likewise, at 1 year no difference was found in the optimal wound scores (73% versus 68%, P =.60) or in visual analog scale cosmesis scores (69 versus 69 mm, P =.95) for octylcyanoacrylate and sutures, respectively. Agreement was poor between early and 3-month wound scores (kappa=.34; 95% confidence interval [CI],.10 to.58) but a strong association existed between 3-month and 1-year wound scores (kappa=.71; 95% CI,.52 to.90). We noted a moderate correlation between 3-month and 1-year results on the visual analog cosmesis scale (intraclass correlation,.48; 95% CI, .30 to.63).
                One year after wound repair, no difference is noted in the cosmetic outcomes of traumatic lacerations treated with octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and sutures. The assessment of wounds 3 months after injury and wound repair provides a good measure of long-term cosmetic outcome. To compare vaginal repair augmented by mesh with traditional colporrhaphy for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.
                Prospective randomised controlled trial.
                Tertiary teaching hospital.
                One hundred and thirty-nine women with stage >or=2 prolapse according to the pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) system requiring both anterior and posterior compartment repair.
                Subjects were randomised to anterior and posterior vaginal repair with mesh augmentation (mesh group, n = 69) or traditional anterior and posterior colporrhaphy (no mesh group, n = 70).
                The primary outcome was the absence of POP-Q stage >or=2 prolapse at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were symptoms, quality-of-life outcomes and satisfaction with surgery. Complications were also reported.
                For subjects attending the 12-month review, success in the mesh group was 81.0% (51 of 63 subjects) compared with 65.6% (40/61) in the no mesh group and was not significantly different (P-value = 0.07). A high level of satisfaction with surgery and improvements in symptoms and quality-of-life data were observed at 12 months compared to baseline in both groups, but there was no significant difference in these outcomes between the two groups. Vaginal mesh exposure occurred in four women in the mesh group (5.6%). De novo dyspareunia was reported by five of 30 (16.7%) sexually active women in the mesh group and five of 33 (15.2%) in the no mesh group at 12 months.
                In this study, vaginal surgery augmented by mesh did not result in significantly less recurrent prolapse than traditional colporrhaphy 12 months following surgery.
There is good evidence from three trials that open mesh repair is superior to suture repair in terms of recurrences, but inferior when considering wound infection. Six trials yielded insufficient evidence as to which type of mesh or which mesh position (on- or sublay) should be used. There was also insufficient evidence to advocate the use of the components separation technique.