Factors predicting stomal wound closure infection rates

被引:31
|
作者
Mirbagheri, N. [1 ,2 ]
Dark, J. [3 ]
Skinner, S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Frankston Hosp, Dept Surg, Frankston, Vic, Australia
[2] Dandenong Hosp, Acad Surg Unit, Dandenong, Vic 3175, Australia
[3] Univ Melbourne, Dept Finance, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
Stoma; Surgical site wound infection; Surgical technique; LOOP ILEOSTOMY CLOSURE; LOW ANTERIOR RESECTION; PURSE-STRING SUTURE; HARTMANNS PROCEDURE; SKIN CLOSURE; COMPLICATIONS; REVERSAL; TAKEDOWN;
D O I
10.1007/s10151-012-0908-4
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Stoma closure is associated with high wound infection rates. The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for infection rates in such wounds, with particular emphasis on assessing the importance of the stomal wound closure technique. A retrospective analysis of 142 patients who had undergone ileostomy or colostomy closure between 2002 and 2011 was performed. Postoperative outcome as measured by wound infection rate was recorded. Three different closure techniques were identified: primary closure (PC), primary closure with Penrose drain (PCP) and purse-string circumferential wound approximation technique (PSC). Other factors such as age, sex, ASA score, type of prophylactic antibiotics used, diabetes, smoking and obesity were also analysed. All other techniques were excluded. Our series consisted of 142 stomal closures (90 ileostomy and 52 colostomy closures). The patients had a median age of 63.5 years with an interquartile range of 50.1-73.2 years. The overall wound infection rate was 10.7 %. PC, PCP and PSC were associated with wound infection rates of 17.9, 10.5 and 3.6 %, respectively. Compared to PSC, PC and PCP were associated with significantly higher wound infection rates (p = 0.027 and p = 0.068, respectively). Obesity was a significant risk factor for wound infection (p = 0.024). Use of triple-agent antibiotics prophylactically had a protective effect on the infection rate (p = 0.012). To reduce stomal wound closure infection rates, we recommend institution of closure techniques other than PC with or without a drain. Risk factors such as obesity should be addressed, and prophylactic triple antibiotics should be administered.
引用
收藏
页码:215 / 220
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION AND CLOSURE TECHNIQUE
    CASWELL, HT
    BERNARD, HR
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1963, 185 (01): : 51 - &
  • [12] STOMA CLOSURE AND WOUND-INFECTION
    NILOFF, PH
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1995, 38 (05) : 466 - 466
  • [13] Alternative Stomal Closure Technique
    Gulack, Brian C.
    Shah, Ami N.
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2024, 59 (04) : 748 - 749
  • [14] Stomal Mucocutaneous Dehiscence as a Complication of a Dynamic Wound Closure System Following Laparostomy: A Case Report
    Raber, Menno Hendrikus
    Steenvoorde, Pascal
    de Wit, Ralph
    OSTOMY WOUND MANAGEMENT, 2011, 57 (01) : 34 - 37
  • [15] Risk factors for surgical site infection after stoma closure comparison between pursestring wound closure and conventional linear wound closure: Propensity score matching analysis
    Yamamoto, Masashi
    Tanaka, Keitaro
    Masubuchi, Shinsuke
    Ishii, Masatsugu
    Hamamoto, Hiroki
    Suzuki, Shigenori
    Ueda, Yasuhiko
    Okuda, Junji
    Uchiyama, Kazuhisa
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2018, 215 (01): : 58 - 61
  • [16] CYST-GASTROSTOMY STOMAL CLOSURE
    VICKERS, FN
    MCPHERSO.RC
    ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 1965, 90 (01) : 1 - &
  • [17] DEFINING WOUND-INFECTION IN STOMA CLOSURE
    BELLIVEAU, P
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1995, 38 (02) : 108 - 109
  • [18] WOUND-INFECTION DURING STOMA CLOSURE
    HACKAM, DJ
    ROTSTEIN, OD
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1995, 38 (02) : 191 - 191
  • [19] DIFFERENCES IN WOUND CLOSURE RATES IN 12 TREE SPECIES
    MARTIN, JM
    SYDNOR, TD
    HORTSCIENCE, 1987, 22 (03) : 442 - 444
  • [20] Closure of dehisced operative sites without wound freshening results in acceptable rates of repeat dehiscence and infection
    Justiniano, H.
    Eisen, D. B.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2009, 161 (04) : 953 - 958