No abstract

BACKGROUND The method adopted for incision closure has an influence on the outcomes of wound healing. The study was conducted to compare the ‘mass closure’ method with the conventional layer closure, and to find out the suitable surgical closure method for midline laparotomy incision. METHODS A prospective comparative study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching institute over a period of 2 years. Patients > 14 years of age, who were operated on by midline laparotomy incision, were included in the study group (N = 60). Either a ‘mass closure’ or the conventional layer closure method was adopted as per the operating surgeon’s choice. Based on the method used the cases were allocated into two groups, each with 30 patients. In the ‘mass closure’ group (Group A), continuous suturing was used in 22 patients and interrupted closure in 8 patients. In the ‘layered closure’ group (Group B), the abdomen was closed in layers using absorbable suture for the peritoneum (together with transversalis fascia) and non-absorbable for the linea alba. The patients were followed up postoperatively, and for 6 months after discharge from the hospital in follow-up for the detection of the wound complications. RESULTS The mean age of patients in Group A was 40.9 ± 15.48 years, and 41.03 ± 14.73 in Group B. There were 25 males and 5 females in Group A and 23 males and 7 females in Group B. Closure time of incision was significantly lower in the mass closure group (P < 0.05). The postoperative complications in Group A was 20 % (Seroma-1 patient, infection-3, partial wound dehiscence-1, and hernia-1). In Group B, the overall complication rate was 36 % (Seroma-3 patients, infection-5, burst abdomen- 1, hernia- 2). CONCLUSIONS Mass closure method is better than the conventional layer closure for the midline laparotomy incision. KEYWORDS Laparotomy, Layered Closure, Midline Incision, Mass Closure, Suture Technique