Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 12/2010

01-12-2010

Wound Infection Following Stoma Takedown: Primary Skin Closure versus Subcuticular Purse-string Suture

Authors: Thao T. Marquez, Dimitrios Christoforidis, Anasooya Abraham, Robert D. Madoff, David A. Rothenberger

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 12/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Stoma closure has been associated with a high rate of surgical site infection (SSI) and the ideal stoma-site skin closure technique is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of SSI following primary skin closure (PC) versus a skin-approximating, subcuticular purse-string closure (APS).

Methods

All consecutive patients undergoing stoma closure between 2002 and 2007 by two surgeons at a single tertiary-care institution were retrospectively assessed. Patients who had a new stoma created at the same site or those without wound closure were excluded. The end point was SSI, determined according to current CDC guidelines, at the stoma closure site and/or the midline laparotomy incision.

Results

There were 61 patients in the PC group (surgeon A: 58 of 61) and 17 in the APS group (surgeon B: 16 of 17). The two groups were similar in baseline and intraoperative characteristics, except that patients in the PC group were more often diagnosed with benign disease (p = 0.0156) and more often had a stapled anastomosis (p = 0.002). The overall SSI rate was 14 of 78 (18%). All SSIs occurred in the PC group (14 of 61 vs. 0 of 17, p = 0.03).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that a skin-approximating closure with a subcuticular purse-string of the stoma site leads to less SSI than a primary closure. Randomized studies are needed to confirm our findings and assess additional end points such as healing time, cost, and patient satisfaction.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Konishi T, Watanabe T, Kishimoto J et al (2006) Elective colon and rectal surgery differ in risk factors for wound infection. Ann Surg 244(5):758–763CrossRefPubMed Konishi T, Watanabe T, Kishimoto J et al (2006) Elective colon and rectal surgery differ in risk factors for wound infection. Ann Surg 244(5):758–763CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Kaidar-Person O, Person B, Wexner S (2005) Complications of temporary loop ileostomy. J Am Coll Surg 201(5):759–773CrossRefPubMed Kaidar-Person O, Person B, Wexner S (2005) Complications of temporary loop ileostomy. J Am Coll Surg 201(5):759–773CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Riesener KP, Lehnen W, Hofer M et al (1997) Morbidity of ileostomy and colostomy closure: impact of surgical technique and perioperative treatment. World J Surg 21:103–108CrossRefPubMed Riesener KP, Lehnen W, Hofer M et al (1997) Morbidity of ileostomy and colostomy closure: impact of surgical technique and perioperative treatment. World J Surg 21:103–108CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Wong K, Remzi F, Gorgun E et al (2005) Loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy: outcome in 1,504 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 48:243–250CrossRefPubMed Wong K, Remzi F, Gorgun E et al (2005) Loop ileostomy closure after restorative proctocolectomy: outcome in 1,504 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 48:243–250CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Hackam D, Rotstein O (1995) Stoma closure and wound infection: an evaluation of risk factors. Can J Surg 38(2):144–148PubMed Hackam D, Rotstein O (1995) Stoma closure and wound infection: an evaluation of risk factors. Can J Surg 38(2):144–148PubMed
6.
go back to reference van de Pavoordt H, Fazio V, Jagelman D et al (1987) The outcome of loop ileostomy closure in 293 cases. Int J Colorect Dis 2:214–217CrossRef van de Pavoordt H, Fazio V, Jagelman D et al (1987) The outcome of loop ileostomy closure in 293 cases. Int J Colorect Dis 2:214–217CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Vermulst N, Vermeulen J, Haebroek E et al (2006) Primary closure of the skin after stoma closure. Dig Surg 23:255–258CrossRefPubMed Vermulst N, Vermeulen J, Haebroek E et al (2006) Primary closure of the skin after stoma closure. Dig Surg 23:255–258CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
go back to reference Sutton E, Williams N, Marshall L et al (2002) A technique for wound closure that minimizes sepsis after stoma closure. ANZ J Surg 72:766–767CrossRefPubMed Sutton E, Williams N, Marshall L et al (2002) A technique for wound closure that minimizes sepsis after stoma closure. ANZ J Surg 72:766–767CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML et al (1999) Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 20(4):247–278CrossRef Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML et al (1999) Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 20(4):247–278CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Amin S, Memon M, Armitage N et al (2001) Defunctioning loop ileostomy and staples side-to-side closure has low morbidity. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 83:246–249PubMed Amin S, Memon M, Armitage N et al (2001) Defunctioning loop ileostomy and staples side-to-side closure has low morbidity. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 83:246–249PubMed
12.
go back to reference Phang P, Hain J, Perez-Ramirez J et al (1999) Techniques and complications of ileostomy takedown. Am J Surg 177:463–466CrossRefPubMed Phang P, Hain J, Perez-Ramirez J et al (1999) Techniques and complications of ileostomy takedown. Am J Surg 177:463–466CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Lewis P, Bartolo D (1990) Closure of loop ileostomy after restorative proctocolectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 72:263–265PubMed Lewis P, Bartolo D (1990) Closure of loop ileostomy after restorative proctocolectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 72:263–265PubMed
14.
15.
17.
go back to reference Fasth S, Hulten L (1984) Loop-ileostomy: a superior diverting stoma in colorectal surgery. World J Surg 8:401–407CrossRefPubMed Fasth S, Hulten L (1984) Loop-ileostomy: a superior diverting stoma in colorectal surgery. World J Surg 8:401–407CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Williams LA, Sagar PM, Finan PJ et al (2007) The outcome of loop ileostomy closure: a prospective study. Colorectal Dis 10:460–464CrossRefPubMed Williams LA, Sagar PM, Finan PJ et al (2007) The outcome of loop ileostomy closure: a prospective study. Colorectal Dis 10:460–464CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Lahat G, Tulchinsky H, Goldman G et al (2005) Wound infection after ileostomy closure: a prospective randomized study comparing primary closure vs. delayed primary closure techniques. Tech Coloproctol 9:206–208CrossRefPubMed Lahat G, Tulchinsky H, Goldman G et al (2005) Wound infection after ileostomy closure: a prospective randomized study comparing primary closure vs. delayed primary closure techniques. Tech Coloproctol 9:206–208CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Garcia-Botello S, Garcia-Amengol J, Garcia-Granero E et al (2004) A prospective audit of the complications of loop ileostomy construction and takedown. Dig Surg 21:440–446CrossRefPubMed Garcia-Botello S, Garcia-Amengol J, Garcia-Granero E et al (2004) A prospective audit of the complications of loop ileostomy construction and takedown. Dig Surg 21:440–446CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Khoo R, Cohen M, Chapman G et al (1994) Loop ileostomy for temporary fecal diversion. Am J Surg 167:519–522CrossRefPubMed Khoo R, Cohen M, Chapman G et al (1994) Loop ileostomy for temporary fecal diversion. Am J Surg 167:519–522CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Wexner S, Taranow D, Johansen O et al (1993) Loop ileostomy is a safe option for fecal diversion. Dis Colon Rectum 36:349–354CrossRefPubMed Wexner S, Taranow D, Johansen O et al (1993) Loop ileostomy is a safe option for fecal diversion. Dis Colon Rectum 36:349–354CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Milanchi S, Nasseri Y, Kidner T et al (2009) Wound infection after ileostomy closure can be eliminated by circumferential subcuticular wound approximation. Dis Colon Rectum 52(3):469–474PubMed Milanchi S, Nasseri Y, Kidner T et al (2009) Wound infection after ileostomy closure can be eliminated by circumferential subcuticular wound approximation. Dis Colon Rectum 52(3):469–474PubMed
Metadata
Title
Wound Infection Following Stoma Takedown: Primary Skin Closure versus Subcuticular Purse-string Suture
Authors
Thao T. Marquez
Dimitrios Christoforidis
Anasooya Abraham
Robert D. Madoff
David A. Rothenberger
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 12/2010
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0753-4

Other articles of this Issue 12/2010

World Journal of Surgery 12/2010 Go to the issue