Longitudinal versus transverse incision for common femoral artery exposure: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

A longitudinal or a transverse incision is routinely used for common femoral artery (CFA) exposure. Some believe a transverse incision is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative complications. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of postoperative surgical site infection, lymphatic complications, wound dehiscence and haematoma formation when using a longitudinal or transverse incision for CFA exposure. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were adhered to. We searched various databases such as MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase for relevant studies from inception till 31 May 2020. Relevant search terms such as 'longitudinal', 'transverse', 'vertical', 'horizontal', 'femoral', 'incision' were used. We included both randomized controlled trials and case-controlled studies, and extracted data related to study characteristics and postoperative complications. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to obtain the pooled proportions and risk ratios (RR) for our study outcomes. We included seven studies with a total of 5922 groin incisions. A longitudinal incision was associated with a significantly higher incidence of wound infection (RR 2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-7.70, P= 0.03) and wound dehiscence (RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.06-7.77, P= 0.04). The risk of lymphatic complications (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.39-3.05, P= 0.87) and wound haematoma (RR 2.85, 95% CI 0.88-9.21, P= 0.08) were similar. A longitudinal incision may be associated with a higher incidence of wound infection and wound dehiscence, as compared to using a transverse incision for CFA exposure.