Seid M H, McDaniel-Owens L M, Poole G V, Meeks G R
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, USA.
Arch Surg. 1995 Apr;130(4):394-7. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1995.01430040056009.
To determine whether interrupted en bloc suture or continuous running mass suture technique for closure of abdominal incisions results in stronger wounds, and to determine the time required for each technique.
Randomized trial.
Arthur C. Guyton Animal Facilities, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson.
Male Sprague-Dawley rats.
A midline laparotomy was performed on 103 rats that were separated into two groups using computer-generated random numbers. In group 1, incisions were repaired using a continuous mass closure suture technique. In group 2, incisions were repaired using an en bloc interrupted suture technique.
Wound bursting pressure was determined on postoperative day 7. The time required to repair each incision was recorded.
Continuous mass closure suture technique resulted in significantly greater wound strength (P < .05) and required significantly less time (P < .000001).
Continuous mass closure suture technique is superior to interrupted en bloc closure with respect to wound strength and closure time.
确定腹部切口闭合采用间断整块缝合或连续连续缝合技术是否会产生更强的伤口,并确定每种技术所需的时间。
随机试验。
密西西比大学医学中心杰克逊分校亚瑟·C·盖顿动物设施。
雄性斯普拉格-道利大鼠。
对103只大鼠进行中线剖腹术,使用计算机生成的随机数将其分为两组。第1组,采用连续整块缝合技术修复切口。第2组,采用整块间断缝合技术修复切口。
术后第7天测定伤口破裂压力。记录修复每个切口所需的时间。
连续整块缝合技术导致伤口强度显著更高(P < 0.05),所需时间显著更少(P < 0.000001)。
在伤口强度和闭合时间方面,连续整块缝合技术优于间断整块缝合。