15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A randomised comparison of polydioxanone (PDS) and polypropylene (Prolene) for abdominal wound closure.

      Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England
      Abdomen, surgery, Aged, Clinical Trials as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Plastics, Polydioxanone, Polyesters, Polypropylenes, Postoperative Complications, Random Allocation, Sutures, Wound Healing, drug effects

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Two hundred and eighty four patients undergoing laparotomy by vertical incision were randomly allocated to closure with interrupted mass sutures of No. 1 polydioxanone (PDS) or No. 1 polypropylene (Prolene). Dehiscence occurred in 0.7% of the PDS group but in 6.4% of the Prolene group (P = 0.018). Wound infection occurred in 8.6% of the PDS group and 15.4% of the Prolene group (P = 0.1). One hundred and ninety patients attended for review at a minimum of one year. Incisional herniation, usually asymptomatic, was present in 11% of each group. Knots were palpable in 2% of the PDS patients but in 12% of the Prolene: wound pain occurred in 12% of the PDS group but in 23% of the Prolene group (P = 0.06). These results suggest that PDS may be useful for abdominal closure.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article