Matz Daniel, Engelhardt Saskia, Wiencierz Andrea, Soysal Savas Deniz, Misteli Heidi, Kirchhoff Philipp, Heizmann Oleg
Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Agaplesion Diakonieklinikum Rotenburg, 27356 Rotenburg (Wuemme), Germany.
Clinical Trial Unit, University Hospital of Basel, 4031 Basel, Switzerland.
J Clin Med. 2024 Nov 12;13(22):6803. doi: 10.3390/jcm13226803.
: The general use of triclosan-coated suture material (TCSM) for wound closure to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs) remains controversial. There is no conclusive evidence in the literature to support this and recommendations by professional organizations are contradictory. Therefore, the main objective of the study was to evaluate the 30-day rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) after elective open abdominal surgery using triclosan-coated versus uncoated running sutures (NCSM) for skin closure. : This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study enrolled patients scheduled for open elective abdominal surgery, intraoperatively assigned to either the use of triclosan-coated or non-coated sutures for skin closure. The follow up was 30 days after surgery to detect SSIs. Secondary endpoints were wound dehiscence and reoperation rate due to wound dehiscence within 30 days, all-cause 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. Potential risk factors for poor wound healing were evaluated in multivariate analysis. Data were analyzed in an intention to treat analysis. : In total, 364 patients (171 males [47%]) were randomized, 182 in either group. Six underwent urgent reoperation prior to first visit and were excluded from analysis. In the full analysis set (FAS), 358 were analyzed. SSI within 30 days occurred in 22 [12.2%] patients in the control group compared to 32 [18%] in the study group. The risk difference was not statistically significant (5.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.6-13.2%; = 0.128). The wound dehiscence rate within 30 days was 14 of 179 [7.8%] in the NCSM group vs. 19 of 178 [10.7%] in the TCSM group. The difference in re-operation rates due to wound dehiscence was 0 of 179 [2.8%] vs. 5 of 178 [2.8%] in either group and not statistically significant ( = 0.0706). Among all patients recruited, 8 died within 30 days after surgery. Three of them died before the first assessment of the primary endpoint on day 3 and were therefore excluded from the FAS. The 30-day mortality rate was 2 of 180 [1.1%] in the NCSM group vs. 3 of 178 [1.7%] in the TCSM group. The majority of SSIs occurred in the superficial layer of the wound in both study groups (8.9% vs. 9.6%). The median [inter quartile range (IQR)] length of hospital stay was 13 [9.0, 19.2] days in the NCSM group vs. 11 [9.0, 16.8] days in the TCSM group There was a tendency towards shorter hospitalization in the study group (0.72 days [6%]). : Our prospective randomized controlled trial could not confirm the superiority of TCSM for skin closure after elective open abdominal surgery in terms of SSI rates in a 30-day follow up period. Therefore, based on our results, a general recommendation for its use in all surgical fields cannot be justified.
使用三氯生涂层缝合材料(TCSM)进行伤口缝合以预防手术部位感染(SSI)的普遍做法仍存在争议。文献中没有确凿证据支持这一点,专业组织的建议也相互矛盾。因此,本研究的主要目的是评估在择期开放性腹部手术中,使用三氯生涂层连续缝合线与未涂层连续缝合线(NCSM)进行皮肤缝合后30天的手术部位感染(SSI)发生率。
这项前瞻性、随机、双盲研究纳入了计划进行开放性择期腹部手术的患者,术中随机分配使用三氯生涂层或未涂层缝合线进行皮肤缝合。术后随访30天以检测SSI。次要终点包括伤口裂开以及术后30天内因伤口裂开导致的再次手术率、全因30天死亡率和住院时间。在多因素分析中评估了伤口愈合不良的潜在风险因素。数据采用意向性分析。
总共364例患者(171例男性[47%])被随机分组,每组182例。6例在首次就诊前接受了急诊再次手术,被排除在分析之外。在全分析集(FAS)中,对358例患者进行了分析。对照组30天内发生SSI的患者有22例[12.2%],研究组为32例[18%]。风险差异无统计学意义(5.8%;95%置信区间(CI)-1.6 - 13.2%;P = 0.128)。NCSM组30天内伤口裂开率为179例中的14例[7.8%],TCSM组为178例中的19例[10.7%]。两组因伤口裂开导致的再次手术率差异为179例中的0例[2.8%] vs. 178例中的5例[2.8%],无统计学意义(P = 0.0706)。在所有招募的患者中,8例在术后30天内死亡。其中3例在术后第3天首次评估主要终点之前死亡,因此被排除在FAS之外。NCSM组30天死亡率为180例中的2例[1.1%],TCSM组为178例中的3例[1.7%]。两个研究组中大多数SSI发生在伤口表层(8.9% vs. 9.6%)。NCSM组住院时间中位数[四分位间距(IQR)]为13[9.0, 19.2]天,TCSM组为11[9.0, 16.8]天。研究组有住院时间缩短的趋势(0.72天[6%])。
我们的前瞻性随机对照试验未能证实,在择期开放性腹部手术后30天随访期内,就SSI发生率而言,TCSM用于皮肤缝合具有优越性。因此,基于我们的研究结果,在所有手术领域普遍推荐使用TCSM是不合理的。