Use of barbed suture in total hip prosthesis. Prospective randomized study

• Published in: Revista española de cirugía ortopédica y traumatología (English ed.) Vol. 65; no. 1; pp. 63 - 68
• Main Authors: Serrano Chinchilla, P, Gamba, C, León García, A, Tey Pons, M, Marqués López, F
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English; Spanish
• Published: 01.01.2021
• ISSN: 2173-576X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.recot.2020.10.003

INTRODUCTIONThe correct closure of the surgical wound is an important step in the procedure of a total hip prosthesis implantation (total hip arthroplasty, THA), which aims to a correct healing of the wound and minimize the risk of complications. The objective of our study is to determine if the use of a bidirectional barbed suture decreases the closing time after THA, in the fascial and subcutaneous plane, when compared to the conventional suture polyglactin 910. The hypothesis is that there is no difference in closing time when comparing both sutures. MATERIAL AND METHODProspective single blind randomized study comparing two groups: study group with the use of bidirectional continuous barbed suture (Quill™) (Gr. Q) and a control group (Gr. V) using discontinuous polyglactin 91 suture (Vicryl™). Closure was performed in two planes (fascial and subcutaneous) simultaneously by two surgeons. The exclusion criteria were: previous surgeries on the same hip, revision surgeries, major deformities and allergies to suture components. The variables under study were: 1) fascia closure time, subcutaneous and global; 2) surgical wound infection; and 3) dehiscence. RESULTS82 patients (39 Gr. Q, 43 Gr. V) were included. The global closing time was shorter in Gr. Q (5 min 59 sec) compared to Gr. V (7.01 min), (p < 0.04). They showed differences in subcutaneous closure: Gr. Q shorter time with a 37 seconds difference (p = 0.048). Differences in fascial plane were not observed. Superficial infection was observed in one Gr. Q patient and another in Gr. V; one case of deep infection in Gr. Q (p = 0.29). One patient presented dehiscence of the wound in Gr. Q (p = 0.3). However, these differences did not show statistical significance. CONCLUSIONSThe use of a barbed suture allows a shorter closing time compared to the conventional one. However, despite this decrease in time, no differences were found in terms of the appearance of infection or wound dehiscence.