• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

造口关闭术后环形(荷包缝合法)与一期皮肤缝合:最新的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Circular (purse-string) vs primary skin closure following stoma closure: an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Menegon Tasselli F, Pata F, Fuschillo G, Signoriello G, Bondurri A, Sciaudone G, Selvaggi F, Pellino G

机构信息

Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Policlinico CS, Piazza Miraglia 2, 80138, Naples, Italy.

Department of Pharmacy, Health and Nutritional Sciences, University of Calabria, Rende, Italy.

出版信息

Tech Coloproctol. 2025 Apr 5;29(1):93. doi: 10.1007/s10151-025-03135-1.

DOI:10.1007/s10151-025-03135-1
PMID:40188299
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11972173/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) are the most common complication after stoma closure. Circular skin closure (CSC) has been proposed to reduce SSI with comparable or even better outcomes than conventional primary sutures (PS). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare circular with primary skin closure in stoma closure.

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was performed for articles published between January 2010 and June 2023, including all randomized control trials (RCT) on wound infection of adult patients following stoma reversal. The primary outcome was 30-day SSI; secondary outcomes were operative time, length of stay, and incisional hernia.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were identified that included a total of 606 patients undergoing stoma closure surgery. Four percent of patients in the CSC group developed SSI, compared to 27% of patients undergoing PS. The 30-day SSI rate was lower after the circular skin closure (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.21; p < 0.00001, I = 0%). There was no difference in the operative time (99.2 vs 103.5 min; MD - 0.17, 95% CI - 0.37, 0.03; p = 0.10), length of stay (7.1 vs 7.7 days; MD - 0.34, 95% CI - 0.55, - 0.12; p = 0.002), and incisional hernia rate (2% vs 4%; OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23, 1.60; p = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

CSC is associated with lower SSI rate and should be preferred to linear skin closure technique after stoma closure surgery.

摘要

背景

手术部位感染(SSI)是造口关闭术后最常见的并发症。有人提出采用环形皮肤缝合(CSC)来减少SSI,其效果与传统的一期缝合(PS)相当,甚至更好。本荟萃分析的目的是比较造口关闭术中环形皮肤缝合与一期皮肤缝合的效果。

方法

对2010年1月至2023年6月发表的文章进行系统文献回顾,纳入所有关于成年患者造口回纳术后伤口感染的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局是30天手术部位感染;次要结局是手术时间、住院时间和切口疝。

结果

共纳入8项RCT,总计606例接受造口关闭手术的患者。CSC组4%的患者发生SSI,而接受PS的患者为27%。环形皮肤缝合后30天手术部位感染率较低(比值比0.11,95%置信区间0.06 - 0.21;p < 0.00001,I² = 0%)。手术时间(99.2分钟对103.5分钟;平均差 -0.17,95%置信区间 -0.37,0.03;p = 0.10)、住院时间(7.1天对7.7天;平均差 -0.34,95%置信区间 -0.55,-0.12;p = 0.002)和切口疝发生率(2%对4%;比值比0.61,95%置信区间0.23,1.60;p = 0.31)无差异。

结论

CSC与较低的SSI率相关,造口关闭手术后应优先于线性皮肤缝合技术。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/4e8e320a2b47/10151_2025_3135_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/25e2a039b2ba/10151_2025_3135_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/65962ef4fd7f/10151_2025_3135_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/b87ff23260c9/10151_2025_3135_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/30d6e7dd77b9/10151_2025_3135_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/4d12a7469596/10151_2025_3135_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/4e8e320a2b47/10151_2025_3135_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/25e2a039b2ba/10151_2025_3135_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/65962ef4fd7f/10151_2025_3135_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/b87ff23260c9/10151_2025_3135_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/30d6e7dd77b9/10151_2025_3135_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/4d12a7469596/10151_2025_3135_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c044/11972173/4e8e320a2b47/10151_2025_3135_Fig6_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Circular (purse-string) vs primary skin closure following stoma closure: an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis.造口关闭术后环形(荷包缝合法)与一期皮肤缝合:最新的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Tech Coloproctol. 2025 Apr 5;29(1):93. doi: 10.1007/s10151-025-03135-1.
2
[Efficacy comparison of purse-string vs. linear closure of the wound following stoma reversal: systematic review and meta-analysis].[造口回纳术后伤口荷包缝合与直线缝合的疗效比较:系统评价与荟萃分析]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Dec 25;22(12):1188-1195. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.12.016.
3
Purse-string closure versus conventional primary closure of wound following stoma reversal: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.荷包缝合与常规缝合在肠造口还纳术后的对比:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2018 Apr;52:208-213. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.02.027. Epub 2018 Feb 21.
4
Purse-string versus linear closure of the skin wound following stoma reversal: A meta-analysis with RCT and systematic review.荷包缝合与线性缝合在肠造口还纳术后皮肤切口关闭中的应用:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析及系统综述。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Aug 30;103(35):e39477. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000039477.
5
Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal.造口回纳术患者荷包式皮肤缝合与直线式皮肤缝合的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Mar 12;3(3):CD014763. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014763.pub2.
6
Purse-string vs. linear skin closure at loop ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.荷包缝合与线性皮肤缝合在回肠袢式造口还纳术中的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Tech Coloproctol. 2019 Mar;23(3):207-220. doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-01952-9. Epub 2019 Feb 26.
7
[Gunsight closure versus purse-string closure techniques in loop stoma reversal: a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial].回肠造口还纳术中瞄准器闭合术与荷包缝合闭合术的比较:一项多中心前瞻性随机对照试验
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2020 Aug 1;58(8):608-613. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20200421-00315.
8
The Outcome of Purse-string Versus Conventional Wound Closure Techniques in Patients Undergoing Stoma Reversal: A Randomized Controlled Trial.经肛门内镜微创手术治疗直肠阴道瘘的临床疗效
J Pediatr Surg. 2024 Jun;59(6):1186-1189. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.10.062. Epub 2023 Oct 30.
9
A comparison of surgical site infections in children after stoma reversal between purse-string and linear closure.荷包缝合与线性缝合在儿童造口还纳术后手术部位感染的比较。
Pediatr Surg Int. 2022 Jan;38(1):149-156. doi: 10.1007/s00383-021-05011-z. Epub 2021 Sep 21.
10
Quality of life following ostomy reversal with purse-string vs linear skin closure: a systematic review.荷包缝合与直线皮肤缝合回纳造口术后的生活质量:一项系统评价
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2019 Feb;34(2):209-216. doi: 10.1007/s00384-018-3219-z. Epub 2018 Dec 13.

本文引用的文献

1
The Impact of Surgical Site Infection on Health-related Quality of Life: A Systematic Review.手术部位感染对健康相关生活质量的影响:一项系统综述。
Wound Manag Prev. 2021 Jun;67(6):10-19.
2
Outcome of purse-string versus linear skin closure after ileostomy stoma reversal in terms of stoma sites infection and cosmesis.在回肠造口术造口回纳术后,荷包缝合与线性皮肤缝合在造口部位感染和美容效果方面的结局比较。
J Pak Med Assoc. 2021 Feb;71(2(A)):414-416. doi: 10.47391/JPMA.05-673.
3
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.
PRISMA 2020 声明:系统评价报告的更新指南。
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
4
[Gunsight closure versus purse-string closure techniques in loop stoma reversal: a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial].回肠造口还纳术中瞄准器闭合术与荷包缝合闭合术的比较:一项多中心前瞻性随机对照试验
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2020 Aug 1;58(8):608-613. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20200421-00315.
5
Italian guidelines for the surgical management of enteral stomas in adults.意大利成人肠造口手术管理指南。
Tech Coloproctol. 2019 Nov;23(11):1037-1056. doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-02099-3. Epub 2019 Oct 12.
6
Purse-string vs. linear skin closure at loop ileostomy reversal: a systematic review and meta-analysis.荷包缝合与线性皮肤缝合在回肠袢式造口还纳术中的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Tech Coloproctol. 2019 Mar;23(3):207-220. doi: 10.1007/s10151-019-01952-9. Epub 2019 Feb 26.
7
Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure techniques in stoma closure: a comprehensive meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomised trials.造口关闭术中荷包缝合皮肤与线性缝合皮肤技术的比较:一项随机试验的综合荟萃分析及试验序贯分析
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018 Oct;33(10):1319-1332. doi: 10.1007/s00384-018-3139-y. Epub 2018 Aug 3.
8
Comparing Surgical Site Infection and Scar Cosmesis Between Conventional Linear Skin Closure Versus Purse-string Skin Closure in Stoma Reversal - A Randomized Controlled Trial.造口回纳术中传统线性皮肤缝合与荷包式皮肤缝合的手术部位感染及瘢痕美观度比较——一项随机对照试验
Cureus. 2018 Feb 11;10(2):e2181. doi: 10.7759/cureus.2181.
9
Purse-string closure versus conventional primary closure of wound following stoma reversal: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.荷包缝合与常规缝合在肠造口还纳术后的对比:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2018 Apr;52:208-213. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.02.027. Epub 2018 Feb 21.
10
The effect of purse-string approximation versus linear approximation of ileostomy reversal wounds on morbidity rates and patient satisfaction: the 'STOMA' trial.荷包缝合与线性缝合回肠造口还纳术对术后并发症发生率和患者满意度的影响:STOMA 试验。
Tech Coloproctol. 2017 Nov;21(11):863-868. doi: 10.1007/s10151-017-1713-x. Epub 2017 Nov 17.