Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
E-pub ahead of print

Skin closure following abdominal wall reconstruction: three-layer skin suture versus staples

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

  1. Surgical techniques for repair of abdominal rectus diastasis: a scoping review

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewpeer-review

  2. Patient-reported outcomes following interposition arthroplasty of the basal joint of the thumb

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

  3. The Danish Scale for visual rating of massive weight loss body contours. Conceptualization and construct

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

  1. Behandling af navlebrok hos patienter med cirrose

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewpeer-review

  2. Corrigendum to "Large Incisional Hernias Increase in Size" [Journal of Surgical Research 2019; 244: 160-165.]

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

View graph of relations

Skin closure following abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) has received little attention, even though these patients have demonstrated insufficient wound healing. This study assessed the postoperative wound-related complications and patient-reported outcomes after skin closure using single- or triple layer closure following AWR. This was a retrospective study at a University Hospital from 2016 to 2018. Patients were grouped into a single-layer cohort (SLC) and a triple-layer cohort (TLC). Skin incisions closed with either technique were compared. Postoperative complications were registered from chart review (SLC: n = 48, TLC: n = 40). Patient reported-outcomes were assessed through the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) and the Hernia Related Quality of Life survey. A total of 51 patients were included (SLC: n = 26, TLC: n = 25). There was no difference in wound complications after single- or triple-layer skin closure; seroma (SLC: 16.7% vs. TLC: 15%, p = 1.00), surgical site infection (SLC: 4.2% vs. TLC: 7.5%, p = .834), hematoma (SLC: 6.2% vs. TLC: 2.5%, p = .744) and wound rupture (SLC: 2.1% vs. TLC: 2.5%, p = 1.00). Patients who had incisions closed using single-layer closure were more satisfied; PSAQ satisfaction with scar symptoms (SLC: 6.7 points (IQR 0.0-18.3) vs. TLC: 26.7 points (IQR 0.0-33.3), p = .039) and scar aesthetics (SLC 25.9 points (IQR 18.5-33.3) vs. TLC: 37.0 (IQR 29.6-44.4), p = .013). There was no difference in 30-day wound complications after either skin closure technique. The results favoured the single-layer closure technique regarding the cosmetic outcome. Abbreviations: AWR: abdominal wall reconstruction; SLC: single-layer cohort; TLC: triple-layer cohort; PSAQ: patient scar assessment questionnaire; IH: incisional hernia; QOL: quality of life; BMI: body mass index; HerQLes: hernia-related quality of life; ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists; SSO: surgical site occurence; SSI: surgical site infection; LOS: length of stay; RCT: randomized controlled trial.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery
Pages (from-to)1-6
Number of pages6
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2022

    Research areas

  • Hernia, wound, skin, cosmetic, abdominal wall reconstruction

ID: 61834012