Suppr超能文献

随机临床试验:剖宫产术中应用免打结倒刺缝线与传统缝线缝合子宫切口的比较。

A randomized clinical trial of knotless barbed suture vs conventional suture for closure of the uterine incision at cesarean delivery.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ziv Medical Center, Azrieli Faculty of Medicine, Bar-Ilan University, Israel.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ziv Medical Center, Azrieli Faculty of Medicine, Bar-Ilan University, Israel.

出版信息

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Mar;218(3):343.e1-343.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.043. Epub 2018 Feb 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Knotless barbed sutures are monofilament sutures with barbs cut into them. These sutures self-anchor, maintaining tissue approximation without the need for surgical knots.

OBJECTIVE

The hypothesis of this study was that knotless barbed suture could be used on the myometrium to close the hysterotomy at cesarean delivery. The objective was to compare uterine closure time, need for additional sutures, and blood loss between this and a conventional suture.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective, unblinded, randomized controlled trial conducted at the Ziv Medical Center, Zefat, Israel. The primary outcome was the length of time needed to close the uterine incision, which was measured from the start of the first suture on the uterus until obtaining uterine hemostasis. To minimize provider bias, women were randomized by sealed envelopes that were opened in the operating room just prior to uterine closure with either a bidirectional knotless barbed suture or conventional suture. Secondary outcomes included the number of additional hemostatic sutures needed and blood loss during incision closure.

RESULTS

Patients were enrolled from August 2016 until March 2017. One hundred two women were randomized. Fifty-one had uterine closure with knotless barbed suture and 51 with conventional suture. The groups were similar for demographics as well as number of previous cesarean deliveries. Uterine closure time using the knotless barbed suture was significantly shorter than the conventional suture by a mean of 1 minute 43 seconds (P < .001, 95% confidence interval, 67.69-138.47 seconds). Knotless barbed sutures were associated with a lower need for hemostatic sutures (median 0 vs 1, P < .001), and blood loss measured during incision closure was significantly lower (mean 221 mL vs 268 mL, P < .005).

CONCLUSION

The use of a knotless barbed suture is a reasonable alternative to conventional sutures because it reduced the closure time of the uterine incision. There was also less need for additional hemostatic sutures and slightly reduced estimated blood loss.

摘要

背景

无结带线是一种带有倒刺的单丝缝线。这些缝线能够自行固定,无需手术打结即可维持组织的贴合。

目的

本研究的假设是,无结带线可用于剖宫产子宫切开术的子宫肌层缝合。目的是比较这种缝线与传统缝线在子宫关闭时间、需要额外缝线和失血量方面的差异。

研究设计

这是一项在以色列采法特的齐夫医疗中心进行的前瞻性、非盲、随机对照试验。主要结局是测量从子宫上第一针缝线开始到获得子宫止血所需的子宫切口关闭时间。为了最大程度地减少提供者的偏见,通过密封信封对女性进行随机分组,这些信封在手术室中打开,就在子宫用双向无结带线或传统缝线关闭之前。次要结局包括需要额外止血缝线的数量和切口关闭期间的失血量。

结果

2016 年 8 月至 2017 年 3 月期间入组了患者。102 名女性被随机分组。51 名女性使用无结带线缝合子宫,51 名女性使用传统缝线缝合子宫。两组在人口统计学特征以及剖宫产次数方面相似。使用无结带线缝合子宫的关闭时间明显短于传统缝线,平均短 1 分 43 秒(P<0.001,95%置信区间,67.69-138.47 秒)。无结带线与较低的需要止血缝线相关(中位数 0 与 1,P<0.001),并且切口关闭期间的失血量明显较低(平均 221 毫升与 268 毫升,P<0.005)。

结论

与传统缝线相比,无结带线的使用是一种合理的替代方法,因为它缩短了子宫切口的关闭时间。还需要较少的额外止血缝线,估计失血量略有减少。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验