Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - 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 articleResearchpeer-review

  1. ICG angiography in immediate and delayed autologous breast reconstructions: peroperative evaluation and postoperative outcomes

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. A Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 1. Planning and management

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Lipoaspirate Storage Time and Temperature: Effects on Stromal Vascular Fraction Quality and Cell Composition

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. New Validated Method for Measuring Fat Graft Retention in the Breast with MRI

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Breast Reduction with Deskinning of a Superomedial Pedicle: A Retrospective Cohort Study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-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
ISSN2000-656X
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 2021

    Research areas

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

ID: 61834012