Intradermal sutura versus poitns separated points at treatment of surgical abdominal injury contaminated

Authors

  • Emiro Florez, MD. Universidad Libre
  • Gabriel Villegas, MD. Universidad Libre
  • Carlos Duran, Esp. Universidad Libre

Keywords:

Suture intradermal, Separate stitches suture, Abdominal wound closure techniques

Abstract

Objective: Determine the characteristics of the treatment of abdominal surgical wound contaminated with intradermal suture versus separate points in the General Hospital of Barranquilla , from January 2013 to April 2014. Materials and methods: Ambispective analytic cohort study in patients over 18 years undergoing abdominal surgical procedures, in which wounds were handled classified as contaminated; raffia skin performed by intradermal closure techniques (Group 1: 50 patients) or closing separate stitches suture (Group 2: 50 patients). Results: In the group 1 most often present in women with 56%, versus 46% in group 2; mean age 31.5 ± 6.3 years for group 1 and 34.6 ± 5.9 years in group 1; the incidence of surgical site infection in the group 1 group (suture intradermal) reached 12% versus 14% in group 2 (separate stitches suture. Conclusions: Intradermal suture is safe and aesthetic abdominal surgical wounds without increasing the rate of infection, which should be performed to decrease scar cosmetic defects.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Olson MM, Lee JT. Continuos, 10 year wound infection surveillance. Arch Surg. 2001; 21: 321-329

2. Pérez C. ISO Problemática en Colombia. Inf 2006 Ministerio de la Protección Social. 2006; 12; 9-11

3. Peralta J. Infección intrahospitalaria en el Hospital Universitario del Valle 2004 – 2005. Rev de Cirugía General. 2006; 11: 34-7

4. Méndez, Navarro. Sepsis en Cirugía, Factores Involucrados. Rev de Cirugía General. 2006; 12: 111-18

5. Sawyer RG, Preutt TL. Wound infections. Surg Clin North Am 1994; 15: 415-24

6. Arias CA, Quintero GA, Vanegas BE, et al. Surveillance of surgical site infection: a decade of experience at a tertiary care center. World J Surg. In press. 2009; 12: 130-38

7. Dellinger EP. Surgical Infections. Mulholland M, Lillemoe KD, Doherty GM, Maier RV, Upchurch GR. Greenfield’s Surgery. Scientific Principles and Practice. Fourth Edition 2006: 12: 19-36

8. Eslava J, Saavedra C, Cuervo S, Quemba J. Infección de sitio quirúrgico: factores relacionados en una institución de segundo nivel de atención. Infectio. 2002; 6: 95

9. Perencevich E. Health and economic impact of surgical site infections diagnosed after hospital discharge. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2003;9: 196-202

10. Escallón MJ, Lombardi SJ, Lerma AC, Quintero HG, Ferraz E, et al. Herida e infección quirúrgica. Curso avanzado para cirujanos. Santa Fé de Bogotá: Federación Latinoamericana de Cirugía. 1999; 16: 4- 67

Downloads

Published

2014-12-01

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Intradermal sutura versus poitns separated points at treatment of surgical abdominal injury contaminated. (2014). Biociencias, 9(2), 13-18. https://revistas.unilibre.edu.co/index.php/biociencias/article/view/2849