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 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

[1]  S. Doğan,et al.  Prophylactic subcutaneous retention sutures in the prevention of superficial wound separation of midline laparotomy , 2021, International Journal of Gynecological Cancer.

[2]  M. Miserez,et al.  Meta-analysis on Materials and Techniques for Laparotomy Closure: The MATCH Review , 2018, World Journal of Surgery.

[3]  S. Steele,et al.  Closure methods for laparotomy incisions for preventing incisional hernias and other wound complications. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[4]  M. Augustin,et al.  Validity and feasibility of the wound‐QoL questionnaire on health‐related quality of life in chronic wounds , 2017, Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society.

[5]  E. Haglind,et al.  Retrospective review of risk factors for surgical wound dehiscence and incisional hernia , 2017, BMC Surgery.

[6]  I. Gögenur,et al.  Substantial variation among hernia experts in the decision for treatment of patients with incisional hernia: a descriptive study on agreement , 2017, Hernia.

[7]  M. Golling,et al.  Müssen wir den Bauchdeckenverschluss neu erlernen? , 2016, Der Chirurg.

[8]  E. Steyerberg,et al.  Small bites versus large bites for closure of abdominal midline incisions (STITCH): a double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[9]  J. Jeekel,et al.  European Hernia Society guidelines on the closure of abdominal wall incisions , 2015, Hernia.

[10]  A. Aminian,et al.  Prophylactic retention sutures in midline laparotomy in high-risk patients for wound dehiscence: a randomized controlled trial. , 2013, The Journal of surgical research.

[11]  H. Friess,et al.  Design and current status of CONTINT: continuous versus interrupted abdominal wall closure after emergency midline laparotomy - a randomized controlled multicenter trial [NCT00544583] , 2012, Trials.

[12]  J. Brazier The Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey and Its Use in Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation , 1995, PharmacoEconomics.

[13]  Markus W. Büchler,et al.  Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of MonoMax® suture material for abdominal wall closure after primary midline laparotomy—a controlled prospective multicentre trial: ISSAAC [NCT005725079] , 2011, Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.

[14]  M. Büchler,et al.  Elective Midline Laparotomy Closure: The INLINE Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2010, Annals of surgery.

[15]  Daniel Millbourn,et al.  Effect of stitch length on wound complications after closure of midline incisions: a randomized controlled trial. , 2009, Archives of surgery.

[16]  M. Büchler,et al.  Interrupted or Continuous Slowly Absorbable Sutures For Closure of Primary Elective Midline Abdominal Incisions: A Multicenter Randomized Trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541) , 2009, Annals of surgery.

[17]  T. Jørgensen,et al.  Risk Factors for Tissue and Wound Complications in Gastrointestinal Surgery , 2005, Annals of surgery.

[18]  N. Demartines,et al.  Classification of Surgical Complications: A New Proposal With Evaluation in a Cohort of 6336 Patients and Results of a Survey , 2004, Annals of Surgery.

[19]  E. Steyerberg,et al.  Meta‐analysis of techniques for closure of midline abdominal incisions , 2002, The British journal of surgery.

[20]  U. Klinge,et al.  [Factors influencing the development of incisional hernia. A retrospective study of 2,983 laparotomy patients over a period of 10 years]. , 2002, Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen.

[21]  V. Schumpelick,et al.  Einflussfaktoren der Narbenhernienentstehung Retrospektive Untersuchung an 2.983 laparotomierten Patienten über einen Zeitraum von 10 Jahren , 2002, Der Chirurg.

[22]  M. Nagelschmidt,et al.  Negative side-effects of retention sutures for abdominal wound closure. A prospective randomised study. , 2000, The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica.

[23]  C. McHenry,et al.  The association of intra-abdominal infection and abdominal wound dehiscence. , 1998, The American surgeon.

[24]  M. Carlson,et al.  Acute wound failure. , 1997, The Surgical clinics of North America.

[25]  T. Juvonen,et al.  Factors influencing wound dehiscence after midline laparotomy. , 1995, American journal of surgery.

[26]  O. Søreide,et al.  Burst abdomen and incisional hernia after major gastrointestinal operations--comparison of three closure techniques. , 1995, The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica.

[27]  J. Jamart,et al.  A new technique for closing abdominal incisions in patients with poor wound healing. , 1982, American journal of surgery.

[28]  F. Penninckx,et al.  Abdominal Wound Dehiscence in Gastroenterological Surgery , 1979, Annals of surgery.