Background: Wound dehiscence is disruption of any or all of the layers in a wound. At around 7–10 days post operatively leakage of clear sero-sanguinous fluid from the wound is usually the first indicator of burst abdomen. The patient usually feels something ‘giving away’ at this time.It may occur in 3-14.5% cases and is very distressing to the patient.Number of methods of closure of midline laparotomy wound have been introduced in the past to prevent this outcome. The study to compare the result of continuous and interrupted closure of midline emergency laparotomy in respect of burst abdomen. Materials and methods: This randomized controlled trial study was carried out in the Department of Surgery Chittagong Medical College Hospital, Chattogram, duration January 2017 to December 2017. A total of 500 patients were enrolled in this study. Data were collected, statistical analyses were obtained by using window based computer software devised with Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS-23). Results: 250 patients in group A and 250 in B. Surgical wound related post-operative complications were found in 30.4% of the study subjects (n=152).Wound dehiscence was found in 11% subjects, surgical site infection was found in 18.4% subjects and incisional hernia in 1%.All these complications were significantly higher in continuous suture group than interrupted group (p<0.001).Wound dehiscence in 20 subjects, treated with interrupted sutures and in 40 subjects (35 wound dehiscence and 5 incisional hernia)treated with continuous suture. The Relative Risk (RR) of developing wound dehiscence post-operatively was found to be 0.63 (95% CI 0.33 – 0.72) for interrupted suture. This was statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: The interrupted X suture technique is better than continuous suture technique in prevention of burst abdomen in emergency midline laparotomy. Chatt Maa Shi Hosp Med Coll J; Vol.21 (2); July 2022; Page 52-56

Background: Appendicitis is a global disease. Understanding the global evolution of appendicitis in highly industrialized countries and in newly industrialized countries is necessary for planning healthcare resource utilization. Scoring systems have been designed to aid in the clinical assessment of patients with acute appendicitis. The recently introduced Appendicitis Inflammatory Response (AIR) score was designed to overcome these drawbacks. This simple clinical score can correctly classify the majority of patients with suspected appendicitis. To evaluate the AIR score on patients with suspicion of acute appendicitis and its risk stratification and assess the sensitivity and specificity of the AIR score. Materials and methods: This descriptive of observational study was carried out in the Department of Surgery, Chittagong Medical College Hospital, Chattogram from 21st March to 20th September 2017. Total 100 cases of appendicitis patients were selected after careful history taking, thorough general and local examination and appropriate investigations fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: The present study of 100 selected cases reveals that maximum number of patients (54.0%) were between 15-25 years age group, mean age of appendicitis was 24.5±8.9 years. The sensitivity and Specificity of the Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score (AIR score) in diagnosis and risk stratification of acute appendicitis was 85.2% and 96.9% respectively. Similarly, the positive predictive value and accuracy rate for the same is 93.5 % and 93.0% respectively. Conclusion: Through associating easily applicable clinical criteria and two simple laboratory tests AIR score help in diagnosis and risk stratification of suspected appendicitis and could guide decision-making to reduce admissions, optimize utility of diagnostic imaging and prevent negative explorations. IAHS Medical Journal Vol 5(2), Dec 2022; 46-51