Skip to content

Barbed sutures versus staples for closure in total hip arthroplasty using wound ooze as a primary outcome measure: A prospective study

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery (Hong Kong)
Volume27
Issue number2
DOIs
DateAccepted/In press - 22 May 2019
DatePublished (current) - 20 Jun 2019

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic joint infection is a rare, but devastating complication of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Postoperative wound discharge and deep infection are related. We examined whether barbed sutures were associated with a decrease in the incidence of postoperative wound discharge when compared with skin closure using metal staples.

METHODS: Prospective nonrandomized comparison between two groups (35 barbed suture closures vs. 49 staple closures). Wounds were assessed daily for postoperative wound discharge until dry. Hemoglobin and hematocrit were recorded at the preoperative assessment and on day 3 postoperative.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to age, body mass index, gender, preoperative hemoglobin, preoperative hematocrit, or estimated blood volume. The number of days elapsed until the wound was dry was significantly lower in the barbed suture group than the staples group (p < 0.0001). In the staples cohort, ongoing wound ooze resulted in delayed hospital discharge in three (6%) patients, six bed days total.

CONCLUSION: Barbed sutures reliably reduce the period of postoperative wound ooze following primary THA compared to staple closure. The use of barbed sutures may prevent delayed patient discharge from hospital, decreasing the bed burden.

    Structured keywords

  • Centre for Surgical Research

    Research areas

  • barbed suture, wound discharge, Total hip arthroplasty, wound closure, infection, staples

Download statistics

No data available

Documents

Documents

  • Full-text PDF (final published version)

    Rights statement: This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Sage at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2309499019857166 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Final published version, 181 KB, PDF document

    Licence: CC BY-NC

DOI

View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups