A randomised comparison of polydioxanone (PDS) and polypropylene (Prolene) for abdominal wound closure.
Two hundred and eighty four patients undergoing laparotomy by vertical incision were randomly allocated to closure with interrupted mass sutures of No. 1 polydioxanone (PDS) or No. 1 polypropylene (Prolene). Dehiscence occurred in 0.7% of the PDS group but in 6.4% of the Prolene group (P = 0.018). Wound infection occurred in 8.6% of the PDS group and 15.4% of the Prolene group (P = 0.1). One hundred and ninety patients attended for review at a minimum of one year. Incisional herniation, usually asymptomatic, was present in 11% of each group. Knots were palpable in 2% of the PDS patients but in 12% of the Prolene: wound pain occurred in 12% of the PDS group but in 23% of the Prolene group (P = 0.06). These results suggest that PDS may be useful for abdominal closure.
D000005:Abdomen / Q000601:surgery*; D000368:Aged; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010969:Plastics; D016687:Polydioxanone; D011091:Polyesters; D011126:Polypropylenes; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011897:Random Allocation; D013537:Sutures; D014945:Wound Healing / Q000187:drug effects*
D010969:Plastics; D011091:Polyesters; D011126:Polypropylenes; D016687:Polydioxanone