3 years ago

Does the Difference in Fascial Closure Technique Affect Postoperative Pain?

To compare postoperative incisional pain on postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 14 when using a fascial closure device (FCD) versus a traditional fascial closure (TFC) of the 12-mm upper quadrant port during robotic surgery. Time required to close the incision was also compared. Design Randomized controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I). Setting Two academic affiliated hospitals, The Hospital of Central Connecticut and The University of Connecticut. Patients Women undergoing robotic surgery for benign indications by minimally invasive gynecologists at our institutions between November 2012 and October 2014 were enrolled in the study at their preoperative visit. Interventions Patients were randomized to either an FCD or TFC immediately before closure of the fascial incision. Pain score using a 10-point analog pain scale was recorded on POD 1 and POD 14. Time to close the fascial incision, length of surgery, and body mass index were also recorded. Measurements and Main Results Sixty-seven patients were enrolled, and 65 were randomized at the time of the fascial closure, whereas 2 enrolled patients converted to laparotomy. Statistical analysis demonstrated that pain scores differed by fascial closure technique. Mean pain scores on POD 1 were 3.43 ± 2.48 and 2.06 ± 2.03 for the FCD and TFC, respectively (p = .028). On POD 14 the mean pain scores were 1.97 ± 2.48 and .83 ± 1.42 for the FCD and TFC, respectively (p = .102). Times to close fascia were 106.5 ± 102.28 seconds and 141.97 ± 102.85 seconds for the FCD and TFC, respectively (p = .138). Conclusion Our study demonstrates that at POD 1 the use of the fascia closure device results in higher pain scores without a significant difference in closure time.

Publisher URL: www.sciencedirect.com/science

DOI: S1553465017304089

You might also like
Discover & Discuss Important Research

Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.

  • Download from Google Play
  • Download from App Store
  • Download from AppInChina

Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.