Hughes Abdomen Closure Technique Versus Continuous Closure in Emergency Midline Laparotomy: A Randomized Controlled Study

Abstract

Background Abdominal wound dehiscence, a serious postoperative issue, remains a significant concern for surgeons due to its potential to increase patient mortality and morbidity. Disruption can occur at any point after surgery, sparking debate over the optimal closure method for midline vertical abdominal wounds. Therefore, it's crucial to determine the safest approach. Our randomized clinical trial is planned to compare the risk of a burst abdomen associated with the Hughes abdominal closure technique to that of continuous abdominal closure. Methods All patients >18 years scheduled for emergency midline laparotomy were randomly assigned into two groups using computer-generated random numbers: Group A underwent Hughes repair (12 patients) and Group B underwent continuous closure (17 patients). Preoperative data, including patient demographics, and postoperative outcomes, such as time for rectus closure, wound dehiscence, surgical site infection (SSI), and length of hospital stay, were documented for analysis. Results The study found that the average patient age was 37.89 years, with more males than females. Both groups had an equal distribution of co-morbidities (p = 0.468), but none of these factors were statistically significant. Burst abdomen occurred in 25% of group A and 41.1% of group B (p = 0.367, not significant). Incisional hernia was absent in both groups. Surgical site infection (p = 0.119) and respiratory complications (p = 0.16) were not statistically significant between groups. However, in group A, the regressive analysis showed significant associations between burst abdomen, surgical site infection (p = 0.018), and respiratory complications (p = 0.007), while in group B, these associations were not significant (p = 0.252 for SSI and p = 0.906 for respiratory complications). Conclusion The occurrence of burst abdomen and closure time differences between continuous and Hughes techniques were not significant. The Hughes technique was quicker to learn (32 vs. 22 minutes). Burst abdomen was more common in continuous closure (group A: 25% vs. group B: 41%), favoring the Hughes technique. Factors like age, gender, and others didn't significantly impact the burst abdomen in either group.