Published online Aug 7, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i29.4571
Peer-review started: June 19, 2023
First decision: July 6, 2023
Revised: July 10, 2023
Accepted: July 17, 2023
Article in press: July 17, 2023
Published online: August 7, 2023
In the traditional intestinal stoma closure surgery, the interrupted suturing technique used has some issues, such as longer incisions and higher tension on the incision, which may increase the risk of postoperative complications. To address these concerns, scholars have proposed the use of the “gunsight suture” technique. This method involves using a gun-shaped incision instead of the conventional linear incision, leaving a gap in the center for drainage of blood and fluids to reduce the risk of infection. Building on this, we have proposed an improved gunsight suture technique.
Motivated by the need to enhance patient outcomes, this study focuses on developing an improved prophylactic stoma reversal abdominal closure suturing technique. Our goal is to reduce incision infection rates and alleviate patient burden, improving a key issue in stoma closure methods. We strive to contribute to the advancement of surgical research and help shape safer and more effective surgical practices in the future.
To compare the outcomes of the improved gunsight suture technique with traditional interrupted suture techniques in enterostomy closure. The objective is to minimize complications and related burdens following prophylactic ileostomy closure.
This study analyzed 270 patients who underwent prophylactic ileostomy closure surgery at Qilu Hospital from April 2017 to December 2021. The patients were divided into two groups, one group received sutures using the improved gunsight method while the other group was sutured with the traditional interrupted suture method, and data on various parameters such as operation time, postoperative pain score, and hospitalization costs were collected. Non-parametric tests and chi-square tests were used for data analysis.
This retrospective study compared two suture methods for prophylactic ileostomy closure surgery in 270 patients. The modified gunsight suture group had better outcomes, including lower incidence of surgical site infections, shorter hospital stays, and fewer dressing changes than the traditional simple interrupted suture group. Laboratory parameters, postoperative temperature, pain scores, and time to first bowel gas passage did not differ significantly. The modified gunsight suture group had slightly lower surgical costs and significantly lower scar formation after incision healing.
The modified Gunsight suture technique reduces the risk of surgical site infection and shortens postoperative hospitalization. Despite requiring additional surgical steps, the technique lowers surgical costs and is a viable option for wound closure.
Despite the study’s retrospective design and challenges in obtaining accurate data on bowel obstruction incidence and long-term complications like incisional hernias, it provides valuable insights. However, the single-center data source may introduce bias during data collection and analysis. Further research on larger patient populations is needed to evaluate the technique’s long-term effectiveness and potential benefits.