Comparación entre suturas para cierre profundo y superficial en reemplazo total de rodilla: seguimiento a un año

Abstract

IntroductionDifferent materials and techniques have been developed for superficial and deep closure in total knee replacement (TKR), but there is no solid evidence that allows to recommend a specific technique that decreases the surgical post-operative complications. The purpose of this study is to compare the use of two deep closure techniques (barbed suture vs. braided absorbable suture) and superficial (staples vs. polypropylene suture) in TKR. Materials and methodsAn observational retrospective study was carried out in 240 patients. Those individuals were excluded with previous open knee surgery, arthrofibrosis, patients who underwent TKR due to tumor lesions or a follow up for less than one year. ResultsThe skin was closed in 176 patients with staples and in 64 patients with Prolene®. Deep closure was performed with Stratafix® in 164 patients and with Vicryl® in 75 patients. Also, complications related to the wound and functionality were recorded in the first postoperative year. Superficial infection for closure with prolene presented an HR in favor of 2.6 with a confidence interval (CI) of 95%=1.1–6.2; p=0.029 and in deep closure a HR in favor of Vicryl® of 0.22, 95% CI=0.96–5.8; p=0.05 ConclusionsThis study demonstrated a significant increase in the incidence of superficial infection after TKR when deep closure is performed with barbed sutures and superficial closure with polypropylene suture. However, there were no significant differences in other complications related with the wound neither postoperative functionality with the different superficial and deep closure techniques that were evaluated.