Pfannenstiel Incision Closure: A Review of Current Skin Closure Techniques

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 514-520

  Altman, Alon D ^a   Allen, Victoria M ^a   McNeil, Shelly A ^a   Dempster, Jeffrey ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Caesarean section; Pfannenstiel incision; Skin closure; Staples; Suture

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; POLIGLECAPRONE; POLYDIOXANONE; POLYGLACTIN; POLYPROPYLENE;

ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG USE; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY; HUMAN; MEDICAL DEVICE COMPLICATION; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NONHUMAN; OBSTETRIC OPERATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PFANNENSTIEL INCISION; POSTOPERATIVE INFECTION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SCAR FORMATION; SKIN INCISION; STAPLER; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SUTURE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WOUND CLOSURE; WOUND COMPLICATION; WOUND HEALING; WOUND INFECTION; ABDOMEN; REVIEW; SURGICAL INFECTION;

ABDOMEN; CESAREAN SECTION; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; HUMANS; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; SUTURES; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 70249099926     PISSN: 17012163     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34213-X     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Jenkins T.R. It's time to challenge surgical dogma with evidence-based data. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003, 189:423-427.
2. Pearl M.L., Rayburn W.F. Choosing abdominal incision and closure techniques. J Reprod Med 2004, 49:662-670.
3. Meiring L., Cilliers K., Barry R., Nel C.J.C. A comparison of a disposable skin stapler and nylon sutures for wound closure. SAfr Med J 1982, 62:371-372.
4. Gatt D., Quick C.R.G., Owen-Smith M.S. Staples for wound closure: a controlled trial. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1985, 67:318-320.
5. Lubowski D., Hunt D. Abdominal wound closure comparing the proximate stapler with sutures. ANZ J Surg 1985, 55:405-406.
6. Ranaboldo C.J., Rowe-Jones D.C. Closure of laparotomy wounds: Skin staples versus sutures. Br J Surg 1992, 72:1172-1173.
7. Pickford I.R., Brennan S.S., Evans M., Pollock A.V. Two methods of skin closure in abdominal operations: a controlled clinical trial. Br J Surg 1983, 70:226-228.
8. Liu S. Health Service Chapter 2 2003, Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, Ottawa.
9. Joseph K.S., Young D.C., Dodds L., O'Connell C.M., Allen V.M., Chandra S., et al. Changes in maternal characteristics and obstetric practice and recent increases in primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2003, 102:791-800.
10. Alderdice F., McKenna D., Dornan J. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, (1). Art. No.:CD003577. 10.1002/14651858.CD003577.
11. Tan P.C., Mubarak S., Omar S.Z. Absorbable versus nonabsorbable suture for subcuticular skin closure of a transverse suprapubic incision. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2008, 10.1016/j.ijg0.2008.05.023.
12. Wall P.D., Deucy E.E., Glantz C., Pressman E.K. Vertical skin incisions and wound complications in the obese parturient. Obstet Gynecol 2003, 102:952-956.
13. Frishman G.N., Schwartz T.S., Hogan J.W. Closure of Pfannenstiel skin incisions: staples vs. subcuticular suture. J Reprod Med 1997, 42:627-630.
14. Gaertner I., Burkhardt T., Beinder E. Scar appearance of different skin and subcutaneous tissue closure techniques in caesarean section: a randomized study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008, 138:29-33.
15. National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit. Available at: Accessed November 14, 2008. http://www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/trials.
16. Roth J.H., Windle B.H. Staple versus suture closure of skin incisions in a pig model. Can J Surg 1988, 31:19-20.
17. Kummeling A., van Sluijs F.J. Closure of the rectus sheath with a continuous looped suture and the skin with staples in dogs: speed, safety and costs compared to closure of the rectus sheath with interrupted sutures and the skin with continuous subdermal suture. Vet Q 1998, 20:126-130.
18. Johnson A., Rodeheaver G.T., Durand L.S., Edgerton M.T., Edlich R.F. Automatic disposable stapling devices for wound closure. Ann Emerg Med 1981, 10:631-635.
19. Stillman R.M., Bella F.J., Seligman S.J. Skin wound closure: the effect of various wound closure methods on susceptibility to infection. Arch Surg 1980, 115:674-675.
20. Stillman R.M., Marino C.A., Seligman S.J. Skin staples in potentially contaminated wounds. Arch Surg 1984, 119:821-822.
21. Obermair A., Crandon A., Perrin L., Walsh T., Carrazo M., Nicklin J. Randomized trial of skin closure after laparotomy for gynaecological surgery. ANZ J Surg 2007, 77:460-463.
22. Johnson A., Young D., Reilly J. Caesarean section surgical site infection surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2006, 64:30-35.
23. Mangram A.J., Horan T.C., Pearson M.L., Silver L.C., Jarvis W.R. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection. Am J Infect Control 1999, 27:97-132.
24. Ceydeli A. Aesthetically pleasant ending for a running subcuticular suture. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2005, 29:583.
25. Menaker G.M. Wound closure materials in the new millennium. Curr Probl Dermatol 2001, 13:90-94.
26. Tellis V.A. Renal transplant incision closure using new absorbable subcuticular staple device. Clin Transplant 2007, 21:410-412.
27. Petherick E.S., Dalton J.E., Moore P.J., Cullum N. Methods for identifying surgical wound infection after discharge from hospital: a systematic review. BMC Infect Dis 2006, 6:170.
28. Opøien H.K., Valbø A., Grinde-Andersen A., Walberg M. Post-cesarean surgical site infections according to CDC standards: rates and risk factors. A prospective cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol 2007, 86:1097-1102.