Comparison of Surgical Site Infection After Skin Closure by Prolene or Staples in Bilateral Simultaneous Knee Arthroplasty Patients: A Parallel Design Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol
Obada Hasan, Ahsun Jiwani, Laraib Mazhar, Dilshad Begum, Riaz Lakdawala, Shahryar Noordin, Obada Hasan, Ahsun Jiwani, Laraib Mazhar, Dilshad Begum, Riaz Lakdawala, Shahryar Noordin
Abstract
Introduction: Knee arthroplasty also known as the total knee replacement is an orthopedic surgical procedure done to resurface the knee that has been severely damaged by arthritis. After the completion of the surgical procedure, the skin closure is done. The optimal goal of skin closure after the procedure is to promote rapid healing and an acceptable cosmetic result while minimizing the risk of infection. Skin closure after knee arthroplasty is done by using either of the two widely used sutures i.e., polypropylene (Prolene) sutures or the skin staple sutures. There are no standard guidelines as which type of the suture should be used. The present study aims to compare the incidence of surgical site infections (superficial and deep) for Prolene vs staple sutures in the bilateral knee arthroplasty patients within 6 weeks for superficial and within 90 days for deep infection.
Methods: This study will be conducted as an open blinded, parallel design, equivalence randomized controlled trial. The patients would be selected and randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either of the two interventions i.e., Prolene or Staples. Patients undergoing unilateral or staged total knee replacement (TKR) were excluded.
Analysis: The normality assessment will be done using Shapiro Wilk test. Cox proportional hazard regression will be used to check the univariate and multi-variable associations of independent variables with the outcome. Both intention to treat analysis and per protocol analysis would be performed.
Ethics and dissemination: All the required approvals will be taken from the ethical review committee. Informed consent will be taken form the patient to enroll him/her in the study. Results of the study will be disseminated to the study participants, public health and clinical professionals and would also be published in a reputable international journal.The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov and UIN of the registry is NCT04492852.
Highlights: Post-operative surgical site infections and complications are a major concern nowadays.Skin staples are not widely used as compared to Prolene because they are expensive and not easily available in every hospital.There are no standard guidelines as which type of the suture should be used.The type of sutures is being selected on the orders and wishes of the surgeon at the time of skin closure.
Keywords: Knee arthroplasty; prolene sutures; skin closure; skin staple sutures; surgical site infection; total knee replacement.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have no competing interests to declare.
Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s).
References
- Liu S, Wang Y, Kotian RN, Li H, Mi Y, Zhang Y, et al. Comparison of Nonabsorbable and Absorbable Suture in Total Knee Arthroplasty. Medical science monitor: international medical journal of experimental and clinical research. 2018; 24: 7563. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.910785
- Medicine H. Knee Replacement Surgery Procedure. 2019.
- Khan R, Fick D, Yao F, Tang K, Hurworth M, Nivbrant B, et al. A comparison of three methods of wound closure following arthroplasty: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial. The Journal of bone and joint surgery British volume. 2006; 88(2): 238–42. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B2.16923
- Sutton N, Schmitz N-D, Johnston SS. Economic and clinical comparison of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate/polymer mesh tape with skin staples in total knee replacement. Journal of wound care. 2018; 27(Sup 4): S12–S22. DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2018.27.Sup4.S12
- Clinic M. OSTEOARTHRITIS – SYMPTOMS AND CAUSES. 2019.
- Smith TO, Sexton D, Mann C, Donell S. Sutures versus staples for skin closure in orthopaedic surgery: meta-analysis. Bmj. 2010; 340: c1199. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c1199
- Gatt D, Quick C, Owen-Smith M. Staples for wound closure: a controlled trial. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. 1985; 67(5): 318.
- Tajirian AL, Goldberg DJ. A review of sutures and other skin closure materials. Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy. 2010; 12(6): 296–302. DOI: 10.3109/14764172.2010.538413
- Clayer M, Southwood R. Comparative study of skin closure in hip surgery. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery. 1991; 61(5): 363–5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.1991.tb00235.x
- Barrow J, Divecha H, Board T. Skin closure in arthroplasty surgery: Current practice. International wound journal. 2018; 15(6): 966–70. DOI: 10.1111/iwj.12956
- Singhal A, Hussain A. Skin closure with automatic stapling in total hip and knee arthroplasty. JK Practitioner. 2006; 13: 142–3.
- Newman JT, Morgan SJ, Resende GV, Williams AE, Hammerberg EM, Dayton MR. Modality of wound closure after total knee replacement: are staples as safe as sutures? A retrospective study of 181 patients. Patient safety in surgery. 2011. December; 5(1): 1–5. DOI: 10.1186/1754-9493-5-26
- Krishnan R, MacNeil SD, Malvankar-Mehta MS. Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Bmj Open. 2016. January 1; 6(1). DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009257
- Control CfD, Prevention. National healthcare safety network (NHSN). Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Event. Procedure-associated Module SSI. January 2015. Atlanta, GA: CDC. [Accessed 5 Feb 2015].
- Kremers HM, Lewallen LW, Lahr BD, Mabry TM, Steckelberg JM, Berry DJ, Hanssen AD, Berbari EF, Osmon DR. Do claims-based comorbidities adequately capture case mix for surgical site infections? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®. 2015. May; 473(5): 1777–86. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-4083-y
- Yuenyongviwat V, Iamthanaporn K, Hongnaparak T, Tangtrakulwanich B. A randomised controlled trial comparing skin closure in total knee arthroplasty in the same knee: nylon sutures versus skin staples. Bone & joint research. 2016. May; 5(5): 185–90. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.55.2000629
Source: PubMed