Cargando…
Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial
INTRODUCTION: The optimal closure of the abdominal wall after emergency midline laparotomy is still a matter of debate due to lack of evidence. Although closure of the fascia using a continuous, all-layer suture technique with slowly absorbable monofilament material is common, complications like bur...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9685222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36418137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059709 |
_version_ | 1784835455818137600 |
---|---|
author | Wolf, Sebastian Arbona de Gracia, Luis Sommer, Florian Schrempf, Matthias Christian Anthuber, Matthias Vlasenko, Dmytro |
author_facet | Wolf, Sebastian Arbona de Gracia, Luis Sommer, Florian Schrempf, Matthias Christian Anthuber, Matthias Vlasenko, Dmytro |
author_sort | Wolf, Sebastian |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The optimal closure of the abdominal wall after emergency midline laparotomy is still a matter of debate due to lack of evidence. Although closure of the fascia using a continuous, all-layer suture technique with slowly absorbable monofilament material is common, complications like burst abdomen and hernia are frequent. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation evaluates the efficacy and safety of a continuous suture with or without additional interrupted retention sutures for closure of the abdominal fascia. Patients with an indication for a primary emergency midline laparotomy are eligible to participate in this study and will be randomised intraoperatively via block randomisation. Fascia closure in the intervention group will be done with a standard continuous suture with slowly absorbable monofilament material (MonoMax 1, B. Braun, Tuttlingen, Germany) and additional interrupted retention sutures every 2 cm of the fascia using rapidly absorbable braided material (Vicryl 2, Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany). In the control group, the fascia is closed only with the standard continuous suture with slowly absorbable monofilament material. Sample size calculations (n=111 per study arm) are based on the available literature. The primary endpoint is the rate of dehiscence of the abdominal fascia (rate of burst abdomen within 30 days or rate of incisional hernia within 12 months). Secondary endpoints are wound infections, quality of life, length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality. Patients as well as individuals involved in data collection, endpoint assessment, data analysis and quality of life assessment will be blinded. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol, the patient information and the informed consent form have been approved by the ethics committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany (reference number: 20-1041). Study findings will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00024802. WHO UNIVERSAL TRIAL NUMBER: U1111-1259-1956 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9685222 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96852222022-11-25 Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial Wolf, Sebastian Arbona de Gracia, Luis Sommer, Florian Schrempf, Matthias Christian Anthuber, Matthias Vlasenko, Dmytro BMJ Open Surgery INTRODUCTION: The optimal closure of the abdominal wall after emergency midline laparotomy is still a matter of debate due to lack of evidence. Although closure of the fascia using a continuous, all-layer suture technique with slowly absorbable monofilament material is common, complications like burst abdomen and hernia are frequent. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation evaluates the efficacy and safety of a continuous suture with or without additional interrupted retention sutures for closure of the abdominal fascia. Patients with an indication for a primary emergency midline laparotomy are eligible to participate in this study and will be randomised intraoperatively via block randomisation. Fascia closure in the intervention group will be done with a standard continuous suture with slowly absorbable monofilament material (MonoMax 1, B. Braun, Tuttlingen, Germany) and additional interrupted retention sutures every 2 cm of the fascia using rapidly absorbable braided material (Vicryl 2, Ethicon, Norderstedt, Germany). In the control group, the fascia is closed only with the standard continuous suture with slowly absorbable monofilament material. Sample size calculations (n=111 per study arm) are based on the available literature. The primary endpoint is the rate of dehiscence of the abdominal fascia (rate of burst abdomen within 30 days or rate of incisional hernia within 12 months). Secondary endpoints are wound infections, quality of life, length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality. Patients as well as individuals involved in data collection, endpoint assessment, data analysis and quality of life assessment will be blinded. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol, the patient information and the informed consent form have been approved by the ethics committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany (reference number: 20-1041). Study findings will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00024802. WHO UNIVERSAL TRIAL NUMBER: U1111-1259-1956 BMJ Publishing Group 2022-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9685222/ /pubmed/36418137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059709 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Surgery Wolf, Sebastian Arbona de Gracia, Luis Sommer, Florian Schrempf, Matthias Christian Anthuber, Matthias Vlasenko, Dmytro Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
title | Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
title_full | Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
title_fullStr | Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
title_short | Continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (CONIAC-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
title_sort | continuous and interrupted abdominal-wall closure after primary emergency midline laparotomy (coniac-trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled single centre trial |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9685222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36418137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059709 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wolfsebastian continuousandinterruptedabdominalwallclosureafterprimaryemergencymidlinelaparotomyconiactrialstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledsinglecentretrial AT arbonadegracialuis continuousandinterruptedabdominalwallclosureafterprimaryemergencymidlinelaparotomyconiactrialstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledsinglecentretrial AT sommerflorian continuousandinterruptedabdominalwallclosureafterprimaryemergencymidlinelaparotomyconiactrialstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledsinglecentretrial AT schrempfmatthiaschristian continuousandinterruptedabdominalwallclosureafterprimaryemergencymidlinelaparotomyconiactrialstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledsinglecentretrial AT anthubermatthias continuousandinterruptedabdominalwallclosureafterprimaryemergencymidlinelaparotomyconiactrialstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledsinglecentretrial AT vlasenkodmytro continuousandinterruptedabdominalwallclosureafterprimaryemergencymidlinelaparotomyconiactrialstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledsinglecentretrial |