Brown J Kristine, Campbell Brendan T, Drongowski Robert A, Alderman Amy K, Geiger James D, Teitelbaum Daniel H, Quinn James, Coran Arnold G, Hirschl Ronald B
Section of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, CS Mott Children's Hospital, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0245, USA.
J Pediatr Surg. 2009 Jul;44(7):1418-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.051.
In this study, we compared the skin adhesive 2-octylcyanoacrylate to subcuticular suture for closure of pediatric inguinal hernia incisions to determine if skin adhesive improves wound cosmesis, shortens skin closure time, and lowers operative costs.
We prospectively randomized 134 children undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy at our institution to have skin closure with either skin adhesive (n = 64) or subcuticular closure (n = 70). Data collected included age, sex, weight, type of operation, total operative time, and skin closure time. Digital photographs of healing incisions were taken at the 6-week postoperative visit. The operating surgeon assessed cosmetic outcome of incisions using a previously validated visual analog scale, as well as an ordinate scale. A blinded assessment of cosmetic outcome was then performed by an independent surgeon comparing these photographs to the visual analog scale. Operating room time and resource use (ie, costs) relative to the skin closure were assessed. Comparisons between groups were done using Student's t tests and chi(2) tests.
Children enrolled in the study had a mean +/- SE age of 3.7 +/- 0.3 years and weighed 16 +/- 0.8 kg. Patients were predominantly male (82%). Patients underwent 1 of 3 types of open hernia repair as follows: unilateral herniorrhaphy without peritoneoscopy (n = 41; 31%), unilateral herniorrhaphy with peritoneoscopy (n = 55; 41%), and bilateral herniorrhaphy (n = 38; 28%). Skin closure time was significantly shorter in the skin adhesive group (adhesive = 1.4 +/- 0.8 minutes vs suture = 2.4 +/- 1.1 minutes; P = .001). Mean wound cosmesis scores based on the visual analog scale were similar between groups (adhesive = 78 +/- 21; suture=78 +/- 18; P = .50). Material costs related to herniorrhaphy were higher for skin adhesive (adhesive = $22.63 vs suture = $11.70; P < .001), whereas operating room time costs for adhesive skin closure were lower (adhesive = $9.33 +/- 5.33 vs suture = $16.00 +/- 7.33; P < .001). Except for a 7% incidence of erythema in both groups, there were no complications encountered.
There is no difference in cosmetic outcome between skin adhesive and suture closure in pediatric inguinal herniorrhaphy. Material costs are increased because of the high cost of adhesive relative to suture. This is partially offset, however, by the cost savings from reduction in operating room time.
在本研究中,我们将皮肤粘合剂2-氰基丙烯酸辛酯与皮下缝合用于小儿腹股沟疝切口闭合进行比较,以确定皮肤粘合剂是否能改善伤口美观度、缩短皮肤闭合时间并降低手术成本。
我们前瞻性地将在我院接受腹股沟疝修补术的134名儿童随机分为两组,分别采用皮肤粘合剂(n = 64)或皮下缝合(n = 70)进行皮肤闭合。收集的数据包括年龄、性别、体重、手术类型、总手术时间和皮肤闭合时间。术后6周随访时拍摄愈合切口的数码照片。主刀医生使用先前验证的视觉模拟量表以及纵坐标量表评估切口的美容效果。然后由一名独立外科医生对这些照片与视觉模拟量表进行比较,对美容效果进行盲法评估。评估与皮肤闭合相关的手术室时间和资源使用(即成本)。组间比较采用学生t检验和卡方检验。
纳入研究的儿童平均年龄为3.7±0.3岁,体重为16±0.8 kg。患者以男性为主(82%)。患者接受以下3种开放式疝修补术中的1种:非腹腔镜单侧疝修补术(n = 41;31%)、腹腔镜单侧疝修补术(n = 55;41%)和双侧疝修补术(n = 38;28%)。皮肤粘合剂组的皮肤闭合时间明显更短(粘合剂组 = 1.4±0.8分钟,缝合组 = 2.4±1.1分钟;P = 0.001)。基于视觉模拟量表的平均伤口美观度评分在两组之间相似(粘合剂组 = 78±21,缝合组 = 78±18;P = 0.50)。与疝修补术相关的材料成本,皮肤粘合剂更高(粘合剂组 = 22.63美元,缝合组 = 11.70美元;P < 0.001),而使用皮肤粘合剂进行皮肤闭合的手术室时间成本更低(粘合剂组 = 9.33±5.33美元,缝合组 = 16.00±7.33美元;P < 0.001)。除两组均有7%的红斑发生率外,未出现其他并发症。
在小儿腹股沟疝修补术中,皮肤粘合剂和缝合闭合在美容效果上没有差异。由于粘合剂相对于缝合线成本较高,材料成本增加。然而,手术室时间减少带来的成本节约部分抵消了这一增加。