Austin Daniel C, Keeney Benjamin J, Dempsey Brendan E, Koenig Karl M
Department of Orthopaedics, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Department of Orthopaedics, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH, 03756-0001, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Nov;475(11):2655-2665. doi: 10.1007/s11999-017-5474-7. Epub 2017 Aug 11.
Studies have suggested that barbed sutures for wound closure in TKAs are an acceptable alternative to standard methods. However others have observed a higher risk of wound-related complications with barbed sutures.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do 90-day TKA reoperation rates differ between patients undergoing a barbed suture arthrotomy closure compared with a traditional interrupted closure? (2) Do the 90-day reoperation rates of wound-related, deep infection, and arthrotomy failure complications differ between barbed suture and traditional closures?
A retrospective analysis of a longitudinally maintained institutional primary TKA database was conducted on all TKAs performed between April 2011 and September 2015. We compared 884 primary TKAs, where the arthrotomy was closed with a barbed suture, with 1598 primary TKAs closed with the standard interrupted suture. After barbed sutures were introduced at our institution in 2012, the majority of surgeons gradually switched to barbed suture closures, with many using them exclusively by the end of the data collection period. We confirmed in-person followups and available data past 90 days for 97.4% (1556 of 1598) of the knees in patients with standard sutures and 94.8% (838 of 884) of the knees in patients with barbed sutures. Our primary endpoint was all-cause 90-day reoperation; our secondary endpoints considered: wound-related reoperation, as defined by previous studies; deep infection per Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines; and arthrotomy failure, defined intraoperatively as an opening or dehiscence through the previous arthrotomy closure. T tests and chi-square analyses were used to determine differences between the suture cohorts, and bivariate logistic regression was used to determine associations with our 90-day reoperation outcomes.
With the numbers available, there was no association between suture type and 90-day all-cause reoperation (odds ratio [OR], 1.70; 95% CI, 0.82-3.53; p = 0.156). Suture type was not associated with wound-related reoperation (OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 0.97-7.69; p = 0.058). A 0.6% (five of 884) arthrotomy failure rate was observed in the barbed cohort while no (0 of 1598) arthrotomy failures were noted in the traditional group (p = 0.003). Deep infections were rare in both groups (two of 884 barbed sutures, 0 of 1598 standard sutures) and could not be compared.
Although we saw no difference in overall and wound-related 90-day reoperation rates by suture type with the numbers available, we observed a higher frequency in our secondary question of arthrotomy failures when barbed sutures are used for arthrotomy closure during TKA. Given the widespread use of this closure technique, our preliminary pilot results warrant further investigation in larger multicenter cohorts.
Level III, therapeutic study.
研究表明,全膝关节置换术(TKA)中用于伤口闭合的倒刺缝线是标准方法的一种可接受替代方案。然而,其他人观察到使用倒刺缝线会增加伤口相关并发症的风险。
问题/目的:(1)与传统间断缝合相比,接受倒刺缝线关节切开术闭合的患者90天TKA再次手术率是否不同?(2)倒刺缝线和传统缝合在伤口相关、深部感染和关节切开术失败并发症的90天再次手术率上是否存在差异?
对2011年4月至2015年9月期间进行的所有初次TKA手术进行回顾性分析,该分析基于一个长期维护的机构原发性TKA数据库。我们将884例采用倒刺缝线闭合关节切开术的初次TKA手术与1598例采用标准间断缝线闭合的初次TKA手术进行了比较。2012年我们机构引入倒刺缝线后,大多数外科医生逐渐转向使用倒刺缝线闭合,到数据收集期结束时,许多医生完全采用倒刺缝线。我们对标准缝线组97.4%(1598例中的1556例)患者和倒刺缝线组94.8%(884例中的838例)患者进行了90天以上的亲自随访和可获取数据确认。我们的主要终点是90天全因再次手术;次要终点包括:根据先前研究定义的伤口相关再次手术;按照肌肉骨骼感染学会指南定义的深部感染;以及术中定义为通过先前关节切开术闭合处裂开或开裂的关节切开术失败。采用t检验和卡方分析确定缝线组之间的差异,并使用二元逻辑回归确定与90天再次手术结果的关联。
就现有数据而言,缝线类型与90天全因再次手术之间无关联(优势比[OR],1.70;95%置信区间,0.82 - 3.53;p = 0.156)。缝线类型与伤口相关再次手术无关联(OR,2.73;95%置信区间,0.97 - 7.69;p = 0.058)。倒刺缝线组观察到0.6%(884例中的5例)的关节切开术失败率,而传统组未观察到关节切开术失败(1598例中的0例)(p = 0.003)。两组深部感染均罕见(倒刺缝线组884例中有2例,标准缝线组1598例中有0例),无法进行比较。
尽管就现有数据而言,我们未发现缝线类型在总体和伤口相关90天再次手术率上存在差异,但我们观察到在TKA关节切开术闭合中使用倒刺缝线时,关节切开术失败这一次要问题的发生率较高。鉴于这种闭合技术的广泛应用,我们的初步试验结果值得在更大规模的多中心队列中进一步研究。
III级,治疗性研究。