CONTINUOUS VERSUS INTERRUPTED CLOSURE OF MIDLINE WOUND IN EMERGENCY LAPAROTOMIES IN TERMS OF WOUND DEHISCENCE

ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of continuous versus Interrupted closure of midline wound in emergency laparotomies
in terms of wound dehiscence.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was conducted at department of surgery, PGMI Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar.
All selected patients were admitted through emergency department and were divided into two groups,continues
closure group and interrupted closure group,based on type of abdominal wound closure after laparotomy.Study design
was randomized control trial and the duration of study was 6 months in which a total of 180 patients were observed
using 80% power and 95% confidence level, under WHO software for sample size determination.
RESULTS: In this study the results were analyzed as in continuous closure group mean age was 54 years was SD ±
1.26 where as in interrupted closure group mean age was 56 years was SD ± 1.376. In continuous closure group 62%
patients were male and 38% patients were female where as in interrupted closure group 60% patients were male and
40% patients were female. Continuous closure group was effective in 73(80%) patients where as interrupted closure
group was effective in 79(88%) patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Interrupted closure in laparotomy is better than continuous closure in terms of less wound dehiscence/
burst abdomen.
KEY WORDS: Continuous closure, Interrupted closure wound dehiscence, emergency laparotomies