The purpose of this modified Delphi study was to obtain consensus on wound closure (including best practices for each tissue layer of closure) and dressing management in total hip arthroplasty (THA), using an evidence-based approach. The Delphi panel included 20 orthopedic surgeons from Europe and North America. Eighteen statements were identified (14 specific to THA and 4 relating to both THA and total knee arthroplasty) using a targeted literature review. Consensus was developed on the statements with up to three rounds of anonymous voting per topic. Panelists ranked their agreement with each statement on a five-point Likert scale. An a priori threshold of 75% was required for consensus. In Round 1, 15 of 18 statements achieved consensus via a structured electronic questionnaire. In Round 2, the 3 statements that did not achieve consensus were revised during a virtual face to face meeting. An additional 2 statements were edited for clarity. In Round 3, the 5 revised statements achieved consensus via a structured electronic questionnaire. Wound closure related interventions that were recommended for use in THA included: 1) barbed sutures over non-barbed sutures (shorter closing times and overall cost savings); 2) subcuticular sutures over skin staples (lower risk of infections and higher patient preference); 3) mesh-adhesives over silver-impregnated dressings (lower rate of wound complications); 4) negative pressure wound therapy over other dressings (lower wound complications and reoperations and fewer dressing changes); 5) triclosan coated sutures (lower risk of surgical site infection). Using a modified Delphi approach, a panel of 20 orthopedic surgeons achieved consensus on 18 statements pertaining to multi-layer wound closure and dressing management in THA. This study forms the basis for identifying critical evidence gaps within wound management to help reduce variability in outcomes during THA

Aims. Tissue adhesives (TAs) are a commonly used adjunct to traditional surgical wound closures. However, TAs must be allowed to dry before application of a surgical dressing, increasing operating time and reducing intraoperative efficiency. The goal of this study is to identify a practical method for decreasing the curing time for TAs. Methods. Six techniques were tested to determine which one resulted in the quickest drying time for 2-octyle cyanoacrylate (Dermabond) skin adhesive. These were nothing (control), fanning with a hand (Fanning), covering with a hand (Covering), bringing operating room lights close (OR Lights), ultraviolet lights (UV Light), or prewarming the TA applicator in a hot water bath (Hot Water Bath). Equal amounts of TA were applied to a reproducible plexiglass surface and allowed to dry while undergoing one of the six techniques. The time to complete dryness was recorded for ten specimens for each of the six techniques. Results. Use of the Covering, OR Lights, and Hot Water Bath techniques were associated with a 25- (p = 0.042), 27- (p = 0.023), and 30-second (p = 0.009) reduction in drying time, respectively, when compared to controls. The UV Light (p = 0.404) and Fanning (p = 1.000) methods had no effect on drying time. Conclusion. Use of the Covering, OR Lights, and Hot Water Bath techniques present a means for reducing overall operating time for surgeons using TA for closure augmentation, which can increase intraoperative efficiency. Further studies are needed to validate this in vivo. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(8):607–610

Introduction and Aims: Primary wound closure in open tibial fractures has not been recommended. Studies suggest that infections are not caused by the initial contamination but the organisms acquired in the hospital. Primary wound closure after adequate wound care and fracture stabilisation should be a safe concept. Method: We analysed 95 patients with open tibial fractures Gustilo-Anderson Type 1-3a treated with primary fracture stabilisation and delayed wound closure (group I) and primary fracture stabilisation and primary wound closure (group II). In group I, 46 patients (38 males, eight females) with a mean age of 30.2 years (range 16–56) were included. In group II, 49 patients (36 males, 13 females) with a mean age of 33.4 (range 18–69) were included. The mean follow-up in group I was 11.5 (range 9–18) and 11.7 (range 8–16) months. Results: The mean operating time in group I was 96 (range 45–180) minutes, in group II, 101 (range 40–170) minutes. The hospital stay in group I was 8.6 (range 3–20) days and in group II, 15.4 (range 4–52) days. One infectious case in group I was seen (2%) and two cases in group II (4.3%) were found. On further analysis, one case in group II, in our opinion, should not have been treated with primary fixation and wound closure. He only had three doses of a first generation cephalosporin and was operated 20 hours after admission to hospital. The corrected infection rate in group II should therefore should be calculated without that case and then is 2.1%. Conclusions: Our results support recent findings that primary wound closure after thorough debridement in Grade I and II open fractures does not increase the infection rate in comparison to the standard treatment. It shortens hospital stay and is cost-effective treatment. We conclude that primary wound closure is safe

Introduction. Primary wound closure in open tibial fractures has not been recommended. Traditionally initial debridement with fracture stabilisation and delayed wound closure was the accepted treatment. However this practice was developed before the use of prophylactic intravenous antibiotics and improved techniques for fracture stabilisation. Studies suggest that infections are not caused by the initial contamination but the organisms acquired in the hospital. Subsequent primary wound closure after adequate wound care and fracture stabilisation should be a safe concept and should not increase the rate of complications. Material/methods. In a retrospective study we analysed 95 patients with open tibial fractures Gustilo-Anderson Type 1-3a treated at two different teaching hospitals with primary fracture stabilisation and delayed wound closure as group I and primary fracture stabilisation and primary wound closure as group II. Exclusion criteria to the study were the following conditions: Grade 3b and 3c fractures, polytrauma, other fractures, significant medical history, previous surgery 6 months prior to admission. In group I 46 patients (38 males, 8 females) with a mean age of 30.2 years (16-56) were included. 19 sustained Grade 1 open, 16 Grade 2 open, 4 Grade 3a open and 7 gunshot fractures to the shaft of the tibia. In group II 49 patients (36 males, 13 females) with a mean age of 33.4 (18-69) were included. 19 sustained Grade 1 open, 19 Grade 2 open, 3 Grade 3a open and 8 gunshot fractures. The mean follow-up in group 1 was 11.5 (9-18) and 11.7 (8-16) months. The criteria for post-operative infection were clinical/radiological. Results. The mean operating time in group 1 was 96 (45-180) minutes, in group II 101 (40-170) minutes. The hospital stay in group 1 was 8.6 (3-20) days and in group 2 15.4 (4-52) days. One infectious case in group 1 was seen (2%) and two cases in group 2 (4.3%) were found. On further analysis one case in group 2 in our opinion should not have been treated with primary fixation and wound closure. He only had 3 doses of a first generation cephalosporin and was operated 20 hrs after admission to hospital. The corrected sepsis rate in group 2 should therefore should be calculated without that case and then is 2.1%. Discussion. Our results support recent findings that primary wound closure after thorough debridement in Grade 1+2 open fractures does not increase the infection rate in comparison to the standard treatment. It shortens hospital stay and is cost effective treatment. We conclude that primary wound closure is safe. Prospective multicentre studies are needed to further evaluate and result in change of the current practice

Several disadvantages can be attributed to suture knots in wound closure: they are tedious to tie, may be a nidus for infection and can strangulate tissue. They may extrude through skin weeks after surgery. Additional needle manipulations during knot-tying may predispose to glove perforation. A self-anchoring barbed suture has been developed that requires no knots (or slack suture management) for wound closure. The elimination of knot tying has demonstrated some advantages over conventional wound closure methods. It has demonstrated comparable efficacy for the long term closure of C section wounds. The lack of bulk afforded by the knotless suture proves useful in mid face lift applications where knots are a drawback to traditional suture use and cosmesis is of primary importance. This type of suture has demonstrated improved “water tightness” in knee arthrotomy closure compared to a standard interrupted suture technique in a cadaver model, has demonstrated reduced time for total surgery by 10% and time for closure by 33%. Use of this suture has been shown to be safe and effective in many other surgical specialties, while proving easier and faster than traditional suturing technique. Its use is highly recommended

Wound closure is typically not the surgeon's favorite part of the case. It is critical, however, for preventing infection, avoiding early re-operation and is the portion of the procedure that is most directly visible to the patient. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of bidirectional, barbed suture for wound closure in primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA) to determine whether its use is safe, cosmetic and associated with time savings when compared with traditional suture. We carried out a blinded, randomised controlled trial comparing bidirectional, barbed suture (Quill™ SRS; Angiotech Pharmaceuticals) and a traditional absorbable layered closure following primary THA and TKA. We randomised 20 THAs (10 Quill; 10 traditional) and 31 TKAs (16 Quill; 15 traditional). Power analysis determined that a minimum of 23 patients per arm of the study were required to show a significant difference in closure times using an alpha of 0.05 and a beta of 0.80. Wound closure in the Quill group was significantly faster than traditional suture by a mean of 4.1 minutes (9.2 vs. 13.2 minutes; p = 0.0005). Traditional closure required a mean 5.6 sutures, compared to a mean 2.7 sutures (p < 0.0001). The unit cost of the barbed suture was 5–12 times that of conventional suture. One patient who had undergone Quill closure developed a superficial reaction that was managed non-operatively. Our results have been confirmed by a similar recently published randomised study by Gilland et al, who showed a mean reduction in closure time of 4.7 minutes. However, these authors concluded that overall costs were lower with a barbed suture based on a reduction in operative times. This method of closure has also been shown to provide a stronger and more water-tight closure than traditional interrupted sutures

Aim. Wound leakage has been shown to increase the risk of prostetic joint infections (PJIs) in primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (unicondylar and total knee arthroplasty; KA). The aim of this study is to determine whether the addition of a continuous subcuticular bonding stitch to a conventional 3-layer closure method reduces the incidence of prolonged wound leakage and PJIs after THA and KA. Method. This retrospective cohort study included all patients receiving a THA or KA. Patients in the control group with a 3-layer closure method had surgery between November 1. st. 2015 and 2016, and were compared to the study group with a 4-layer closure method that had surgery between January 1. st. 2017 and 2018. The primary outcome was incidence of prolonged wound leakage longer than 72 hours. Differences were evaluated using logistic regression. Incidence of PJIs was the secondary outcome. Results. A total of 439 THA and 339 KA in the control group and 460 THA and 350 KA in the study group were included. In the control group 11.7% of the patients had a prolonged leaking wound compared to 1.9% in the study group (p<0.001). The modified wound closure method showed a protective effect for obtaining prolonged wound leakage; odds ratios were 0.09 (95%CI 0.04–0.22; p<0.001) for THA and 0.21 (95%CI 0.10–0.43; p<0.001) for KA. PJIs decreased from 1.54% to 0.37% (p=0.019). Conclusions. The addition of a continuous subcuticular bonding stitch reduces the incidence of prolonged wound leakage and PJIs after THA and KA compared to a conventional 3-layer wound closure method. The large reduction of incidence in wound leakage and PJIs in this study, combined with relatively negligible cost and effort of the modified wound closure method, would advocate for implementing this wound closure method in arthroplasty

We compared the postoperative wound discharge rates and 3 months clinical results of three types of wound closure and dressing – 2-octylcyanoacrylate with Opstie (G+O), 2-octylcyanoacrylate with Tegaderm (G+T), and Opsite without 2-octylcyanoacrylate (O) in patients having primary total hip arthroplasty. We randomised 141 patients scheduled for primary total hip arthroplasty into 3 arms of this study- G+O, G+T, or O. The extent of wound discharge was recorded on a diagrammatic representation of the dressing in situ on paper and graded each day. Dressings were left in-situ provided the extent of wound discharge allowed for this. The patient was clinically reviewed at 3 months to assess their scar length, cosmesis, scar discomfort, and evidence of superficial or deep wound sepsis. A greater number of patients dressings remained dry on day 1 postoperatively in the two groups with 2-octylcyanoacrylate compared to the no glue group p=0.001. G+T group had a significantly lower proportion of patients with increased leakage of wounds on 2. nd. postoperative day p=0.044. At 3 months review, there was no statistical difference in the Hollander score or scar discomfort. In patients who have had primary total hip arthroplasty, usage of 2-octylcyanoacrylate for wound closure along with Tegaderm dressing reduces wound discharge. The same effect is not noted in glue with Opsite group. Whilst dressing changes required in the non-glue group compared from the two glue groups did not reach statistical significance, this may have clinical relevance for patients and nursing staff. No effect on postoperative length of stay, or wound complications was noted

A suitable wound closure is an indispensable requirement for an uncomplicated and expedient recovery after an abdominal surgery. The closure technique will have a great impact on the healing process of the wound. Surgical complications, such as wound dehiscence (sometimes associated with evisceration), infection, hernia, nerve injury and incisional pain are very common in the postoperative period of an abdominal surgery. Besides, although their development can be promoted by other risk factors like age, sex, lifestyle, diet, health condition, the closure method can also influence the emergence of these undesirable complications. For this reason, and having the wellbeing and quality of life of the patients in mind, particularly high-risk patients, a closure system consisting of anchors applied on either side of the wound that aims to reduce the tension caused on the surrounding tissues of a wound and, consequently, decrease the risk of herniation was evaluated in a pilot animal study and compared with the traditional suture approach

Background. Surgical wound closure is not the surgeon”s favorite part of the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery however it has vital rule in the success of surgery. Knee arthoplasty wounds are known to be more prone to infection, breakdown or delayed healing compared to hip arthroplasty wounds, and this might be explained by the increased tensile force applied on the wound with knee movement. This effect is magnified by the enhanced recovery protocols which aim to obtain high early range of movement. Most of the literature concluded that there is no difference between different closure methods. Objectives. We conducted an independent study comparing the complication rate associated with using barbed suture (Quill-Ethicon), Vicryl Rapide (polyglactins910-Ethicon) and skin staples for wound closure following TKA. Study Design & Methods. Retrospective study where the study group included all the patients admitted to our unit for elective primary knee arthroplasty in 2015, we excluded patients admitted for partial knee arthroplasty, revision knee arthroplasty or arthroplasty for treatment of acute trauma due to the relatively higher complication rates. All the patients notes were reviewed to identify wound related problems such as wound dehiscence, wound infection and delayed healing (defined as delayed wound healing more than 6 weeks). Results. 327 patients were included in this study; 151 in Quill group, 99 in staples group and 77 in the last group where the wound closed with Rapide. We identified 9 (5.9%) cases of wound dehiscence in the Quill group, 3 cases of wound dehiscence in each of other two groups (3.8%) with Rapide and (3%) with staples. On the other hand superficial wound infection was higher with staples with 6 (6%) cases of wound infection compared to the other groups, wound infection occurred in 2 patients (2.5%) with Rapide and 5 patients (3.3%) in the Quill”s group. Most of the delayed wound healing happened after using Quill where it is reported in 5 patients (3.3%) and the lowest was in staples group with 1 patient (1%) and slightly higher percentage in Rapide group 2 patients (2.5%). The total figure of wound related problems was the highest in Quill”s group with 19 reported cases (12.5%), lower in staples” group with 10 cases (1.1%) and the lowest in Rapide”s group with 7 cases (9%). Conclusions. Our study showed different results to the reported literature suggesting that each closure method has its own advantages and disadvantages. Quill is quick, knotless and absorbable but on the other side it is significantly more expensive than other alternatives and it is associated with the highest complication rates. On the other hand Rapide is cheap absorbable alternative with the lowest percentage of wound problems but on the negative side it is time consuming. Finally staples method is the quickest, relatively cheap and rarely associated with wound dehiscence but it is not absorbable which might cause inconvenience to patients

Aims. The aims of this study were to determine if vacuum assisted closure (VAC) therapy affords quicker wound closure in diabetic and ischaemic wounds or ulcers than standard treatment, if it helps debride wounds and if it prevents the need for further surgery. Materials and methods. We retrospectively reviewed 12 patients, average aged 52.1 yrs (22 to 67) at an average of 6.3 months (1 to12 months). Seven had diabetes and three had chronic osteomyelitis. All wounds or ulcers were surgically debrided prior to application of the VAC therapy. The VAC therapy was applied according to the manufacturers instructions. The main outcome measures were the time to satisfactory healing and the change in the wound surface area. Results. Satisfactory healing was achieved in six patients (50%), seven were diabetic and one patient had peripheral vascular disease. The average time to satisfactory healing was 2.5 months, (1 to 6 months). The average size of the wound /ulcer was 7.41 cm2 prior to treatment and 1.58 cm2 following treatment for an average 2.5 months in those in whom the wound/ulcer was still present. VAC therapy helped debride all wounds which remained sloughy following surgical debridement. In 8 patients the need for further surgery, such as soft tissue flaps or more radical surgery was avoided. Conclusion. VAC therapy is a useful adjunct to the standard treatment of chronic wound /ulcers in patients with diabetes or peripheral vascular disease. Its use in foot and ankle surgery leads to a quicker wound closure and in some cases, avoids the need for further surgery. There are significant economic cost savings with its use in foot and ankle surgery

Introduction and Aims: The use of ‘superglue’ (2-Octylcyanoacrylate) in wound closure is well established in other surgical specialties, but not described in orthopaedics. The aim was to compare superglue with staples and subcuticular suture in a prospective randomised trial. Method: One hundred and fifty patients admitted for a primary total knee or hip replacement were randomised to receive either clips, continuous subcuticular suture (3.0 Monocryl) or ‘superglue’ for wound closure. All knee replacements were mobilised on the day of surgery with CPM and hip replacements on the first post-operative day. Patients’ wounds were assessed on day one and at six weeks by a blinded observer. Results: There were 80 hips and 70 total knee replacements performed; 51 wounds were closed with clips, 50 with suture and 49 with superglue. Mean duration of skin closure was significantly shorter with staples, and superglue was significantly faster than suture. There was no significant difference in the complication rates between the groups, including infection, dehiscence or allergic reaction. There was significantly more ooze by day one from the wounds closed with clips than the other two groups. Significantly more of the wounds closed with glue had no strike-through on to the dressing, and were therefore deemed to be ‘sealed’. Patient satisfaction at six weeks was significantly higher with superglue and suture than staples. The suture and super-glue groups had higher median scores on the Hollander wound evaluation scale than staples, however the difference was not statistically significant. Surgeon satisfaction with technique was highest with superglue and staples (no significant difference between the groups), and significantly higher than with subcuticular suture. Conclusion: Superglue is safe to use for skin closure in primary knee and hip arthroplasty. Although closure with staples is faster, superglue is associated with less wound ooze and better patient satisfaction. The cosmetic result with superglue is comparable to that of subcuticular sutures but has a better surgeon satisfaction score

Aims: To compare wound closure using a subcuticular (4/0 PDS) with an interrupted (4/0 Nylon) in open carpal tunnel decompression (CTD). Methods: 78 patients (22 bilateral) were recruited prospectively and randomised when consenting for the trial. All operations were performed by a single surgeon (JW). Patients were reviewed at 2 weeks and 3 months. Patients graded scar appearance on a four-point scale, and digital photographs were taken. Patients scored discomfort level for suture removal, on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS1–10) and a four-point categorical scale. Three consultant hand surgeons graded the digital photographs, using the same scale as the patients. Results: Patients preferred the appearance of the subcuticular closure at 2 weeks (p=0.002); there was no statistical difference by 3 months. There was a trend towards patients þnding subcuticular suture removal less painful. Assessment of scar appearance by the consultants at 2 weeks signiþcantly favoured subcuticular closure (Cons. A: p= < 0.001, Cons. B: p=0.001, Cons. C: p=0.001); there was no signiþcant difference at 3 months. The bilateral cases preferred scar appearance following subcuticular suture (p=0.001). Conclusions: Wound closure in open CTD using subcuticular PDS is safe. Patients and surgeons initially preferred the appearance of the subcuticular scar, when compared to closure with interrupted Nylon. Patients also experienced less pain during subcuticular PDS suture removal

Introduction. Skin closure methods are various in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Subcuticular skin closure techniques, which do not require postoperative stitch removal, are considered to be useful for excellent cosmesis and patients' satisfaction. Basically, subcuticular skin closure provides the tightness and water-tight seal, which leads to loss of postoperative normal physiologic drainage. As a routine wound closure, we performed the subcuticular skin closure with use of absorbable sutures or barbed sutures without staples. According to some previous reports, subcuticular skin closure using barbed sutures resulted in worse clinical outcomes, comparing with conventional skin staples. However, little attention has been paid to the differences between conventional absorbable and barbed sutures in both capsular and subcuticular skin closures. Our purpose was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the barbed suture, comparing to conventional absorbable sutures in TKA. Methods. A total of 81 knees in 75 patients (60 females and 15 males) were enrolled in the current investigation. Mean age was 73 (58–89) years old. All the subjects underwent unilateral or staged bilateral TKA using Balanced Knee System, posterior stabilized design (Ortho Development, Draper, UT). All knees were divided into two groups, as presented in Table 1. In conventional group, capsule was repaired using interrupted number 1 braided absorbable sutures, followed by closure of subdermal layer using a 3-0 monofilament absorbable suture with inverted interrupted knots. Thereafter, subcuticular skin closure was done using 4-0 monofilament absorbable suture, followed by adhesive tape. On the other hand, in barbed suture group, 1-0 and 4-0 unidirectional barbed suture (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) was used for capsule and subcuticular skin closure, respectively. Drains were removed on postoperative day 2. We evaluated closure time from capsule to skin, range of motion (ROM), Hollander Wound Evaluation Score (HWES: maximum score 6/6), and complications. Postoperative ROM and HWES were evaluated on postoperative day 14. As a statistical analysis, the data was compared between groups using Mann-Whitney U-test and Fisher exact probability test. P-values of < 0.05 were considered as significant. Results. 20 knees were allocated to conventional group and 61 knees were allocated to barbed suture group. Preoperative patients' demographics were seen in Table 2. No significant differences were found between groups preoperatively. In terms of clinical results, surgical closure time was significantly fast in barbed suture group, while postoperative range of motion and HWES were not significantly different between groups. In each group, wound related complication was not found. Discussion. According to previous reports, V-Loc provided worse clinical outcomes in wound related complications. However, in the current investigation, barbed suture was safe in wound cosmesis and effective in surgical closure time, comparing to conventional closure. We considered that barbed suture would be safe and effective as a closure method in TKA

Introduction: Wound Hemearthrosis remains a major concern following TKA. This prospective study evaluates the use of a knotless interlocking suture system and its relationship to wound appearance and OR efficiency. Methods: Two groups of patients undergoing TKA in our institution were evaluated using two different wound closure techniques. Group I consisted of twenty five patients who underwent standard closure using interrupted vicryl for the arthrotomy, deep fascia, superficial fascia, followed by staples. Group II consisted of twenty five patients who underwent closure using three separate running barbed sutures (Quill, Angiotech Inc)– first for the arthrotomy, followed by deep fascia, subcuticular and staples. We compared closure times, drain output and postoperative day to achieve zero wound drainage on the dressings. Results: Closure times for Group II averaged 10 minutes faster than Group I. Drain output was decreased in the barbed suture cohort. Wounds achieved zero drainage, on average, one day sooner in Group II and no patients were returned to the OR for hematoma evacuation or arthrotomy disruption. Conclusions: Use of this new technique for closure of TKA incisions can lead to faster operative times, lower drainage outputs and less immediate postoperative wound drainage. It appears that hemostasis is obtained quicker with the use of this barbed suture system while at the same time while maximizing OR efficiency

Purpose: Resection of pelvic sarcoma with limb preservation (internal hemipelvectomy) is a major undertaking. Resection requires large areas of soft-tissue to be removed. Because of wound complications, we manage these defects with immediate tissue transfer (ITT) at the time of resection when a large defect is anticipated. This study compares the outcomes of ITT with primary wound closure (PWC). Method: Twenty patients undergoing 22 separate procedures (1995–2007) were identified in our prospectively maintained database. Demographics, tumour type, operative data and complications, and functional scores (MSTS-1993, TESS) were collected. Results: Twelve defects were managed with ITT, nine with pedicled myocutaneous vertical rectus abdominis (VRAM) flaps (one received double VRAM flaps due to the large defect), two with tensor fascia lata (TFL) rotation flaps (one augmented by local V-Y advancement, the other with gluteus maximus rotation flap) and one received latissimus dorsi free tissue transfer. Four wound complications necessitated operative intervention in this group: two debrided VRAM flaps went on to heal and the two TFL flaps required revision: one to VRAM flap and the other to a latissimus dorsi free flap which ultimately suffered chronic infection and hindquarter amputation was performed. Ten defects were managed with PWC, and 5 wound complications occurred, all five suffered infection, one developed hematoma and one dehisced. One wound resolved with debridement, two healed after revision to pedicled gracilis and gluteus maximus myocutaneous flaps. Two patients were converted to hindquarter amputation due to chronic infection. Functional scores were collected on 8 of 12 living patients, at time of writing. The mean TESS scores were 83 and 73 in the ITT and PWC groups. Five patients in the ITT and 3 in the PWC group were deceased. Conclusion: Soft-tissue closure following pelvic sarcoma resection remains a difficult challenge, and our experience reflects that. There were fewer wound complications (33% v 50%) and slightly better function with ITT than PWC, but this was not statistically significant due to the small size of our study. Although small, this study suggests ITT should be considered whenever a large soft tissue defect is anticipated

Obtaining primary wound healing in Total Joint Arthroplasty (TJA) is essential to a good result. Wound healing problems can occur and the consequences can be devastating to the patient and to the surgeon. Determination of the host healing capacity can be useful in predicting complications. Cierney and Mader classified patients as Type A: no healing compromises and Type B: systemic or local healing compromises factors present. Local factors include traumatic arthritis with multiple previous incisions, extensive scarring, lymphedema, poor vascular perfusion, and excessive local adipose deposition. Systemic compromising factors include diabetes, rheumatic diseases, renal or liver disease, immune compromise, steroids, smoking, and poor nutrition. In high risk situations the surgeon should encourage positive patient choices such as smoking cessation and nutritional supplementation to elevate the total lymphocyte count and total albumin.

Careful planning of incisions, particularly in patients with scarring or multiple previous operations, is productive. Around the knee the vascular viability is better in the medial flap. Thus, use the most lateral previous incision, do minimal undermining, and handle tissue meticulously. We do all potentially complicated TKAs without tourniquet to enhance blood flow and tissue viability. The use of perioperative anticoagulation will increase wound problems.

If wound drainage or healing problems do occur immediate action is required. Deep sepsis can be ruled out with a joint aspiration and cell count, and negative culture and sensitivity. All hematomas should be evacuated and necrosis or dehiscence should be managed by debridement to obtain a live wound. Options available for coverage of complex wound problems include myocutaneous flaps, pedicled skin flaps, and skin grafts. Wet, occlusive dressings and wound VACs encourage epithelisation of chronic wounds.

Our audit examined the rates of complication in the surgical wounds of patients having surgery for fractured neck of femur, comparing the use of skin clips and an absorbable subcuticular suture.

The initial part of the audit compared the commonly used methods of skin closure at our institution, as outlined above. One hundred consecutive patients with fractured necks of femur (NOF) were studied. The closure of the wounds was randomly allocated between skin clips and subcuticular suture. The wounds were monitored for signs of complications, including infection, for the duration of hospital stay. It was found that the use of skin clips carried with it a significantly higher rate of complication (11.1% ) when compared with use of subcuticular absorbable suture (0% ). At this stage, we concluded that the latter method be adopted as departmental policy.

A further study was performed one year later to reevaluate the efficacy of the new practice. A further fifty consecutive patients with NOF were studied using the same parameters as before. Our results demonstrated that the rate of complication was clinically and statistically significant.

We closed the loop of the audit cycle and concluded that the use of an absorbable subcuticular suture should be the preferred method of closure of hip wounds in NOF surgery.

Objectives. Nylon sutures and skin staples are used commonly in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgical wound closure. However, there is no study that compares the wound healing efficacy and patient satisfaction scores of both techniques in the same knee. Methods. We randomised 70 patients who underwent primary TKA into two groups. In one group of 34 patients, the skin at the upper half of the wound was closed with skin staples and the lower half of the wound was closed with simple interrupted nylon sutures. In the other group of 36 patients, the skin at the upper half of the wound was closed with nylon stitches and the lower half of the wound was closed with skin staples. We recorded the wound closure time, pain score at the time of stitch removal, wound complication rate, patient satisfaction score, and the Hollander wound evaluation score at the post-operative periods of five days, 14 days, six weeks, three months, and six months. Each half wound was analysed separately. Results. The mean patient body mass index was 26.8 kg/m. 2. (standard deviation 6.3). A total of 70 nylon stitched wounds and 70 skin stapled wounds were analysed. There were no significant differences in wound complication rates, patient satisfaction score, and the Hollander wound evaluation score between both types of wounds (p > 0.05). The wound closure time for skin stapled wounds was significantly lower than the nylon stitched wounds (p < 0.001). However, the skin stapled wounds had a significantly higher pain score at the time of stitch removal (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Skin staples and nylon stitches had comparable results with respect to wound healing and patient satisfaction in TKA wound closure in non-obese patients. The benefit of skin staples over nylon stitches was a decrease in operative time, but was more painful upon removal. Cite this article: V. Yuenyongviwat. A randomised controlled trial comparing skin closure in total knee arthroplasty in the same knee: nylon sutures versus skin staples. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:185–190. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.55.2000629

Orthopaedic surgical site infections (SSI's) prolong total hospital stays by a median of 2 weeks per patient, approximately double re-hospitalization rates, and increase healthcare costs by more than 300%. Patients with orthopaedic SSI's have significant reductions in their health-related quality of life. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare differences in outcomes between use of sutures and non-absorbable staples for closure of orthopaedic surgical wounds in adults. The primary outcomes were rates of superficial and deep SSI. Secondary outcomes included wound dehiscence, length of hospital stay, patient satisfaction and pain during removal of closure material. Data sources including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, National Institute for Health and Research, UK clinical trials gateway were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT's) meeting inclusion criteria. Sixteen RCT's published between 1987 and 2017 were included. Overall, wound infection outcomes (superficial and deep infections combined) showed no statistically significant difference between closure with staples compared with sutures with arelative risk of 1.17 (95% CI 0.59–2.30, p=0.66). A subgroup was performed specific to hip wound infection outcomes. Interestingly, a sensitivity analysis demonstrated sutures to be statistically favourable (p=0.04) in terms of hip wound infection outcomes. There was no statistically significant difference among secondary outcomes between sutures and staple groups. Overall it appears the choice of sutures or staples in closure of orthopaedic wounds has no effect on wound complications. However, caution is needed in applying the findings to different population groups due to heterogeneity across studies.