Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, NewYork, NY, USA.
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 May;144(5):2207-2212. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05283-9. Epub 2024 Mar 23.
The use of barbed sutures for wound closure in primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has been shown to be effective and safe. However, their effectiveness and safety in revision TJA procedures has not been thoroughly studied. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using barbed suture closure in revision TJA setting.
A total of 80 patients undergoing revision TJA between September 2020 and November 2022 were included in this randomized controlled trial study. Following informed consent, patients were computer-randomized to the treatment arm (barbed suture wound closure) or to the control arm (conventional wound closure). Closure duration, closure rate, number of sutures used and wound related outcomes including complication rates and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) score were compared between groups.
The use of barbed sutures decreased closure time by 6 min (30.1 vs. 36.1 min, P = 0.008) with a higher wound closure rate (6.5 vs. 5.5 mm/minute, P = 0.013). Additionally, the number of sutures used for wound closure in the barbed group was significantly lower than in the control group (6.2 vs. 10.1, respectively, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the rate of postoperative wound complications (P = 0.556) or patient and observer POSAS scores (P = 0.211, P = 297, respectively) between the two groups at 3-month follow-up.
Closure of revision TJA surgical wound utilizing barbed sutures reduced closure time and the number of needles handled by operative staff, with no significant increase in intra- or post-operative complications rate when compared to traditional closure technique.
I.
在初次全关节置换术(TJA)中使用带倒刺缝线进行伤口闭合已被证明是有效且安全的。然而,其在翻修 TJA 手术中的有效性和安全性尚未得到充分研究。本研究旨在评估在翻修 TJA 中使用带倒刺缝线闭合的疗效和安全性。
本随机对照试验共纳入 2020 年 9 月至 2022 年 11 月期间接受翻修 TJA 的 80 例患者。在获得知情同意后,患者通过计算机随机分为治疗组(带倒刺缝线伤口闭合)或对照组(常规伤口闭合)。比较两组之间的闭合时间、闭合率、缝线使用数量以及与伤口相关的结果,包括并发症发生率和患者及观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)评分。
与对照组相比,带倒刺缝线的使用可使闭合时间缩短 6 分钟(30.1 分钟 vs. 36.1 分钟,P=0.008),且闭合速度更快(6.5 毫米/分钟 vs. 5.5 毫米/分钟,P=0.013)。此外,带倒刺缝线组用于伤口闭合的缝线数量明显少于对照组(分别为 6.2 根 vs. 10.1 根,P<0.001)。两组在术后 3 个月随访时,伤口并发症发生率(P=0.556)或患者和观察者 POSAS 评分(P=0.211,P=0.297)均无显著差异。
与传统的闭合技术相比,在翻修 TJA 手术中使用带倒刺缝线可减少闭合时间和手术人员处理的缝线数量,而不会显著增加术中或术后并发症的发生率。
I 级