Clinical study of "double diabolo" vs. continuous suture for laparotomy closure | Gastrointestinal Tract

Clinical study of "double diabolo" vs. continuous suture for laparotomy closure

Authors

  • Francisco Javier Pérez Lara Antequera Hospital
  • Rogelio Zubizarreta Jimenez
  • Tatiana Prieto-Puga Arjona
  • Maria Pitarch Martinez
  • Patricia Maldonado Valdivieso
  • Ruben Garcia Martin
  • Pablo Fernández Galeano

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54844/git.2024.582

Keywords:

suture, physical laws, laparotomy, angles

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Incisional hernia is a common complication after abdominal surgery and presents a significant challenge for digestive surgeons. In 2000, we proposed a new suture design, termed “double diabolo”, which has optimum physical characteristics to ensure that both the thread and the holes are subjected to the least possible tension. We have since tested its effectiveness in theoretical and experimental studies. In the present paper, we demonstrate the effectiveness of this suture at the clinical level. Methods: A study was conducted on 100 patients all requiring a laparotomy. The operation was performed by the same surgeon for every case. Two study groups were compared: group A with 50 patients for whom the laparotomy closure was achieved by continuous suture; and group B with 50 patients for whom the laparotomy closure was achieved by double diabolo suture. The following parameters were assessed: age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, laparotomy size, postoperative (PO) evisceration, PO wound infection, PO hernia, urgent/scheduled surgery, PO hernia duration, PO complications, and follow-up time. Results: The double diabolo suture group showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative infections (16% vs. 38%, P = 0.002) and a non-statistically significant trend toward reducing postoperative hernias (14% vs. 28%, P = 0.14). However, the conclusion regarding “reducing the number of hernias” is unsupported by the results, as statistical significance was not achieved for this outcome.
Conclusion: The double diabolo suture reduces the rate of infection in surgical wounds following laparotomy closure and possibly reduces the number of postoperative hernias, although a statistically significant demonstration of the latter outcome requires further study, with a larger number of patients.

Downloads

Published

2025-07-03

How to Cite

1.
Javier Pérez Lara F, Jimenez RZ, Arjona TPP, Martinez MP, Valdivieso PM, Martin RG, Galeano PF. Clinical study of "double diabolo" vs. continuous suture for laparotomy closure. GIT. 2025;3. doi:10.54844/git.2024.582

Issue

Vol. 3 (2025)

Section

Original Articles

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Clinical study of "double diabolo" vs. continuous suture for laparotomy closure


Francisco Javier Perez Lara1,*, Rogelio Zubizarreta Jimenez2, Tatiana Prieto-Puga Arjona3, Maria Pitarch Martinez3, Patricia Maldonado Valdivieso3, Ruben Garcia Martin3, Pablo Fernández Galeano3

1Chief of Surgery Service, Hospital de Antequera, Antequera 29200, Malaga, Spain

2CEO in DOXA Microfluidics, Rincon de la Victoria 29738, Malaga, Spain

3Digestive Surgeon. Service of Surgery, Hospital de Antequera, Antequera 29200, Malaga, Spain


*Corresponding Author:

Francisco Javier Perez Lara. Hospital de Antequera, Antequera 29200, Malaga, Spain. E-mail: javinewyork@hotmail.com


Received: 16 April 2024 Revised: 20 January 2025 Accepted: 22 May 2025


ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: Incisional hernia is a common complication after abdominal surgery and presents a significant challenge for digestive surgeons. In 2000, we proposed a new suture design, termed “double diabolo”, which has optimum physical characteristics to ensure that both the thread and the holes are subjected to the least possible tension. We have since tested its effectiveness in theoretical and experimental studies. In the present paper, we demonstrate the effectiveness of this suture at the clinical level. Methods: A study was conducted on 100 patients all requiring a laparotomy. The operation was performed by the same surgeon for every case. Two study groups were compared: group A with 50 patients for whom the laparotomy closure was achieved by continuous suture; and group B with 50 patients for whom the laparotomy closure was achieved by double diabolo suture. The following parameters were assessed: age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, laparotomy size, postoperative (PO) evisceration, PO wound infection, PO hernia, urgent/scheduled surgery, PO hernia duration, PO complications, and follow-up time. Results: The double diabolo suture group showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative infections (16% vs. 38%, P = 0.002) and a non-statistically significant trend toward reducing postoperative hernias (14% vs. 28%, P = 0.14). However, the conclusion regarding “reducing the number of hernias” is unsupported by the results, as statistical significance was not achieved for this outcome. Conclusion: The double diabolo suture reduces the rate of infection in surgical wounds following laparotomy closure and possibly reduces the number of postoperative hernias, although a statistically significant demonstration of the latter outcome requires further study, with a larger number of patients.

Key words: suture, physical laws, laparotomy, angles

INTRODUCTION

Laparotomy remains the standard method for major abdominal surgery and emergency procedures. However, in recent years. debate has arisen regarding the optimum closure technique and preferred suture material.

An incisional hernia is a common complication following abdominal surgery, with an incidence of 11%–20% in the general surgical population,[1–4] although this may rise to 40% in high-risk groups, such as patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm or morbid obesity.[5–12]

It is therefore essential to perform a laparotomy closure that provides the best possible results. In this respect, preferences and technologies have evolved over time generating the highly sophisticated products that are used in current practice. However, despite the many innovations that have appeared,[13–16] little progress has been made in suturing techniques, and most surgeons continue to use one of the two classical techniques: continuous suturing or simple interrupted suturing (with minor variations).

In 2020, we proposed a new suture design, offering ideal characteristics for laparotomy closure. This design was based on the physical laws that govern the tension in a line that joins two points. The tension of a suture thread joining two surfaces varies in inverse proportion to the angle of the thread with respect to the perpendicular of the surfaces. Therefore, we proposed a “double-diabolo” suturing method in which each point contains eight 45-degree angles (Figure 1), thus distributing and minimizing the suture tension.

Figure 1

Figure 1. “Double-diabolo” suturing method (each point contains eight 45-degree angles). A: Central stiitch; B: Left lateral stitch; C: Left intermediate stitch; D: Right intermediate stitch; E: Right lateral stitch; F: Final central stitch.

In 2021, we published the theoretical physical study,[17] phase 1 of the process, in which we measured the tension that would be exerted on the thread and the holes of different types of sutures, compared to the double diabolo. Figure 2 summarizes this comparison, when a force of 10 kg is applied to sutures of 10, 20 and 30 cm length.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Comparison of continuous, double diabolo, running X and zig-zag sutures when a force of 10 kg is applied to sutures of 10, 20 and 30 cm length

In 2022, we published the experimental study,[18] phase 2, in which a device applied tension to each suture to its breaking point. This test showed that the double diabolo suture resists a greater pressure before breaking than traditional sutures.

We now propose a clinical study (phase 3) to compare laparotomy closure with the double diabolo suture vs. the continuous suture that is conventionally used.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this study, we test the effectiveness of the double diabolo suture for abdominal closure.

The study population consisted of 100 patients who underwent midline laparotomy at our hospital. In every case, the same surgeon performed the procedure. This population was divided into two groups: group A, a retrospective study of 50 patients who underwent laparotomy closure with continuous suture; group B, a prospective study of 50 patients who underwent laparotomy closure with the double diabolo suture.

In each group, the sutures were inserted 1 cm from the wall, with a distance of 1 cm between sutures and using the same suture material (absorbable monofilament). The abdominal wall was sutured at the fascial layer ensuring adequate tension and alignment of tissue to minimize the risk of infection and incisional hernia. No additional reinforcement such as mesh was used, adhering to the protocol for both suture techniques.

The following parameters were considered: age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, laparotomy size, postoperative (PO) evisceration, urgent/scheduled surgery, PO wound infection, PO hernia, PO hernia time, PO complications, follow-up time.

The study was previously approved by the Ethics and Research Committee of the corresponding Health Area.

All patients receive detailed information about the procedure and its scientific basis, and signed the corresponding consent form.

Inclusion criteria:

  • Patients with midline laparotomy;

  • Age 18–90 years;

  • Agree to participate and provide signed consent

Exclusion criteria:

  • Patients with non-midline laparotomy;

  • Refusal to provide signed consent.

Study variables:

  • Dependent variables: PO hernia

  • Independent variables: age, laparotomy size, PO wound infection, sex, ASA classification, urgent/scheduled surgery, PO hernia time, PO complications, follow-up time

Schedules for visits and data collection:

Group A:

Retrospective assessment of patients (peri- and postoperative complications in clinical history)

Personalized interview and examination, assessing the size of the wound, whether a hernia has occurred and, if so, when (this datum to be included as a complication if it occurred during the first 18 postoperative months).

Group B:

  • 1st visit: Preoperative. Explanation of the study and provision of signed consent

  • Perioperative assessment: wound complications—infection, evisceration

  • 2nd visit: At one month postoperative. Wound review and exploration of possible hernias and other complications

  • 3rd visit: At one year postoperative. Wound review and exploration of possible hernias and other complications (if in doubt, request an imaging test)

Statistical analysis

The association between qualitative variables was determined by the chi-square test. The differences between continuous quantitative variables in two independent groups were determined by Student’s t-test for two independent samples (subject to the condition of normality of the variables in each of the groups compared). In the non-parametric case, the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test was applied.

RESULTS

The diagnoses for the laparotomy cases were categorized as follows:

Group A: colon surgery (36%), bowel obstructions (24%), rectal surgery (14%), gastric resection (12%), anastomotic leakage (4%), and other conditions (10%).

Group B: colon surgery (26%), rectal surgery (20%), bowel obstructions (18%), gastric resection (12%), anastomotic leakage (6%), and other conditions (18%).

Operation modes included urgent procedures in 46% of cases in group A and 36% in group B.

With respect to the study variables age, time of laparotomy, time at which hernia PO recurrence occurred and follow-up time, neither Student's t test nor the Mann-Whitney U test revealed any significant differences, and therefore the study groups were assumed to be homogeneous (Table 1).

Table 1: Data for quantitative variables in two independent groups
Double diabolo
suture 		Continuous
suture
Variable Mean SD Mean SD P value Test
Age (yr) 61.000 16.883 60.000 17.659 0.773 (a)
Laparotomy size (cm) 18.210 5.826 17.710 5.149 0.650 (a)
Hernia time (months) 13.000 6.000 10.857 5.855 0.442 (a)
Follow up (months) 18.570 6.150 18.850 8.271 0.811 (c)
(a) Student’s t-test assuming homogeneity of variances. (c) Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U test. SD: standard deviation

Similarly, the chi square test revealed no significant inter-group differences in terms of the qualitative variables (sex, urgent/scheduled intervention and ASA classification), and so the homogeneity of the groups was maintained in this respect, too (Table 2).

Table 2: Association of the qualitative variables according to group A/group B using Chi square test
Double diabolo
suture 		Continuous
suture		 All
n % n % n % P value
Sex 1
Female 19 38.0 18 36.0 37 37.0
Male 31 62.0 32 64.0 63 63.0
Urgent/scheduled 0.42
Urgent 23 46.0 18 36.0 41 41.0
Scheduled 27 54.0 32 64.0 59 59.0
ASA classification 0.23
1 2 4.0 1 2.0 3 3.0
2 18 36.0 11 22.0 29 29.0
3 30 60.0 38 76.0 68 68.0
Infection 0.02
No 42 84.0 31 62.0 73 73.0
Yes 8 16.0 19 38.0 27 27.0
Hernia 0.14

No 43 86.0 36 72.0 79 79.0
Yes 7 14.0 14 28.0 21 21.0
ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists

However, there were statistically significant differences (P = 0.002) in terms of PO infections, which were less frequent among the patients whose laparotomies were closed using double diabolo sutures (Table 2).

Moreover, there were non-significant differences in terms of PO hernias, which were also less frequent among the patients whose laparotomies were closed using double diabolo sutures (P = 0.14). In fact, there were twice as many hernias in the continuous sutures group (Table 2).

DISCUSSION

Laparotomy remains the standard method for major surgery and emergency procedures. In recent years, however, a debate has arisen regarding the best closure technique and preferred suture material, as the appearance of incisional hernias after laparotomy remains an extremely common problem and poses a challenge to all surgeons.

This complication occurs following 11%–50% of all laparotomies,[19] and an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 patients in the United States require incisional hernia repair each year.[20]

Numerous proposals have been made to improve suture stability. Thus, Sen et al.[21] proposed an algorithm to minimise the length of the suture and keep the needle at an angle orthogonal to the tissue entry point. In another study, Wieskötter et al.[22] compared different types of suture and assessed the biomechanical stability provided to the tendons in each case. Israelsson et al.[3,23–25] addressed the question of which technique should be used to close laparotomies; from the experimental and clinical data considered, they recommended the short stitch technique. On the other hand, a meta-analysis carried out by Henriksen et al.[26] found no significant differences between the results obtained by interrupted and continuous suture techniques.

Despite the technical advances that have been achieved in producing sutures, our review of the literature did not reveal any detailed study of the physical laws that govern the tensions generated on the threads and holes in the sutures, seeking to optimize the method used. In fact, the techniques used remain practically unchanged, that is, the only suture designs described are either continuous or interrupted patterns (with minor variations).

A Cochrane review published in 2017[27] concluded that monofilament sutures should be considered for abdominal closure to reduce the risk of incisional hernia, and absorbable sutures to reduce the risk of chronic wound drainage. It has also been reported that the technique currently preferred in elective midline closure is that of the continuous absorbable suture, as advocated by Diener et al.[28] in their 2010 review. Other experimental studies have also recommended the continuous suture technique over the interrupted suture technique.[29–32] In view of these prior studies, we decided to use absorbable monofilament sutures for both study groups and to take as a control group the patients whose laparotomy closure was performed with continuous sutures.

In this respect, it should be noted that a meta-analysis by Yii et al.[33] concluded that the use of a continuous suture with a suture/wound-length ratio > 4:1 (“small bite”) significantly reduces the rate of laparotomy hernias.

In the double diabolo suture we propose, the sutures are located 1 cm from the wound edge, with a separation of 1 cm between each suture. Obviously, this can be extrapolated to the 4:1 small bites requirement; in other words, the sutures could be given the separation described in the “small bite” design and would continue to enjoy the advantage in terms of the physics in the tension exerted on the suture and the holes (taking into account that the small bite suture is just a continuous suture with less distance between the points, which is equivalent to reducing the scale of the double diabolo suture).

The direct correlation between suture tension, blood flow and wound healing has been demonstrated experimentally by Höer et al.[30] and is corroborated in subsequent articles by the same author[29,31,32]. Klink et al.[34] performed an experimental study using a rodent model to demonstrate that non-elastic monofilament sutures rapidly lose tension independently of the sutured tissue. This hypothetical approach towards reducing tissue compression, resulting in less local tissue damage and hence better wound healing, is of fundamental importance to the surgeon’s goal of avoiding postoperative complications.

The greater the tension in the suture, the worse the blood perfusion. This understanding underpins the theoretical model of the proposed double diabolo suture, in which the angles of which it is formed reduce the tension on the thread and holes, thus producing better blood flow within the laparotomy closure. This relationship might explain the fact that, although the rate of infection was high in both study groups (due to the inclusion of many patients requiring urgent surgery), the reduced tension exerted on the suture thread and holes, in the experimental group, meant there was a significantly lower rate of infections than in the continuous suture group.

Regarding the economic impact of reducing the incidence of incisional hernias, Deerenberg et al.[12] reported that the annual cost of incisional hernia repair in the United States was $3.2 billion. Therefore, if the results of our work are confirmed in the multicentre follow-up study we are now considering, it would be possible to significantly reduce the occurrence of laparotomic hernias, and hence achieve significant financial savings.

In summary, the comparative study of our innovative suture design vs. traditional suture types in laparotomy closure revealed significant differences in a key variable, namely the considerable reduction in postoperative infection rates with the double diabolo suture. Moreover, the incidence of hernias in the patients treated with the latter suture decreased by half, although the study results lacked statistical significance (if the number of patients in the study were increased, significant results would probably be achieved). In the view that this is an essential next step, we are currently designing a prospective randomized multicenter study, with a larger number of patients, to better demonstrate the advantages of using double diabolo vs. continuous sutures for laparotomy closure.

DECLARATIONS

Author contribution

FJ Perez Lara: made a substantial contribution to the concept and design, drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content, approved the version to be published. R. Zubizarreta Jimenez: drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content, approved the version to be published. T. Prieto-Puga: approved the version to be published. M. Pitarch Martínez: approved the version to be published. P. Maldonado Valdivieso: approved the version to be published. R. García Martin: approved the version to be published. P. Fernández Galeano: approved the version to be published.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of interest

There is no conflict of interest with any financial support.

Use of large language models, AI and machine learning tools

None declared.

Data sharing statement

No additional data is available.

REFERENCES

  1. Höer J, Lawong G, Klinge U, Schumpelick V. [Factors influencing the development of incisional hernia. A retrospective study of 2,983 laparotomy patients over a period of 10 years]. Chirurg 2002; 73: 474-480    DOI: 10.1007/s00104-002-0425-5    PMID: 12089832
  2. Mudge M, Hughes LE. Incisional hernia: a 10 year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 1985; 72: 70-71    DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800720127    PMID: 3155634
  3. Millbourn D, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA. Effect of stitch length on wound complications after closure of midline incisions: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Surg 2009; 144: 1056-1059    DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2009.189    PMID: 19917943
  4. Bosanquet DC, Ansell J, Abdelrahman T, Cornish J, Harries R, Stimpson A, et al. Systematic Review and Meta-Regression of Factors Affecting Midline Incisional Hernia Rates: Analysis of 14,618 Patients. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0138745    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138745    PMID: 26389785
  5. Pans A, Elen P, Dewe W, Desaive C. Long-term results of polyglactin mesh for the prevention of incisional hernias in obese patients. World J Surg 1998; 22: 479-82; discussion 482-3    DOI: 10.1007/s002689900420    PMID: 9564292
  6. Gutierrez de la Peña C, Medina Achirica C, Domínguez-Adame E, Medina Díez J. Primary closure of laparotomies with high risk of incisional hernia using prosthetic material: analysis of usefulness. Hernia 2003; 7: 134-136    DOI: 10.1007/s10029-003-0124-2    PMID: 12687426
  7. Strzelczyk JM, Szymański D, Nowicki ME, Wilczyński W, Gaszynski T, et al. Randomized clinical trial of postoperative hernia prophylaxis in open bariatric surgery. Br J Surg 2006; 93: 1347-1350    DOI: 10.1002/bjs.5512    PMID: 17006977
  8. Bevis PM, Windhaber RA, Lear PA, Poskitt KR, Earnshaw JJ, Mitchell DC. Randomized clinical trial of mesh versus sutured wound closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 2010; 97: 1497-1502    DOI: 10.1002/bjs.7137    PMID: 20603858
  9. Abo-Ryia MH, El-Khadrawy OH, Abd-Allah HS. Prophylactic preperitoneal mesh placement in open bariatric surgery: a guard against incisional hernia development. Obes Surg 2013; 23: 1571-1574    DOI: 10.1007/s11695-013-0915-1    PMID: 23512444
  10. Bali C, Papakostas J, Georgiou G, Kouvelos G, Avgos S, Arnaoutoglou E, et al. A comparative study of sutured versus bovine pericardium mesh abdominal closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Hernia 2015; 19: 267-271    DOI: 10.1007/s10029-014-1262-4    PMID: 24820007
  11. Muysoms FE, Detry O, Vierendeels T, Huyghe M, Miserez M, Ruppert M, et al. Prevention of incisional hernias by prophylactic mesh-augmented reinforcement of midline laparotomies for abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2016; 263: 638-645    DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001369    PMID: 26943336
  12. Deerenberg EB, Harlaar JJ, Steyerberg EW, Lont HE, van Doorn HC, Heisterkamp J, et al. Small bites versus large bites for closure of abdominal midline incisions (STITCH): a double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; 386: 1254-1260    DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60459-7    PMID: 26188742
  13. Högström H, Haglund U, Zederfeldt B. Suture technique and early breaking strength of intestinal anastomoses and laparotomy wounds. Acta Chir Scand 1985; 151: 441-443    PMID: 3901638
  14. Högström H, Haglund U, Zederfeldt B. Tension leads to increased neutrophil accumulation and decreased laparotomy wound strength. Surgery 1990; 107: 215-219    PMID: 2154055
  15. Israelsson LA. The surgeon as a risk factor for complications of midline incisions. Eur J Surg 1998; 164: 353-359    DOI: 10.1080/110241598750004382    PMID: 9667469
  16. Trimbos JB, van Rooij J. Amount of suture material needed for continuous or interrupted wound closure: an experimental study. Eur J Surg 1993; 159: 141-143.
  17. Fj Perez Lara, R Zubizarreta Jimenez, Jm Hernández González, T Prieto-puga, F Moya Donoso. A novel suturing technique, based on physical principles. World J Adv Res Rev 2020; 8: 080-090    DOI: 10.30574/wjarr.2020.8.3.0462
  18. Perez Lara FJ, Zubizarreta Jimenez R, Moya Donoso FJ, Hernández Gonzalez JM, Prieto-Puga Arjona T, Marín Moya R, et al. Novel suturing technique, based on physical principles, achieves a breaking point double that obtained by conventional techniques. World J Gastrointest Surg 2021; 13: 1039-1049    DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v13.i9.1039    PMID: 34621479
  19. Pauli EM, Rosen MJ. Open ventral hernia repair with component separation. Surg Clin North Am 2013; 93: 1111-1133    DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2013.06.010    PMID: 24035078
  20. Borab ZM, Shakir S, Lanni MA, Tecce MG, MacDonald J, Hope WW, et al. Does prophylactic mesh placement in elective, midline laparotomy reduce the incidence of incisional hernia? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery 2017; 161: 1149-1163    DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.09.036    PMID: 28040255
  21. Sen S, Garg A, Gealy DV, Mckinley S, Jen Y, Goldberg K. Automating multi-throw multilateral surgical suturing with a mechanical needle guide and sequential convex optimization. 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) 2016    DOI: 10.1109/icra.2016.7487611
  22. Wieskötter B, Herbort M, Langer M, Raschke MJ, Wähnert D. The impact of different peripheral suture techniques on the biomechanical stability in flexor tendon repair. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2018; 138: 139-145    DOI: 10.1007/s00402-017-2836-2    PMID: 29134318
  23. Israelsson LA, Jonsson T. Overweight and healing of midline incisions: the importance of suture technique. Eur J Surg 1997; 163: 175-180.
  24. Israelsson LA, Jonsson T. Suture length to wound length ratio and healing of midline laparotomy incisions. Br J Surg 1993; 80: 1284-1286    DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800801020    PMID: 8242299
  25. Cengiz Y, Blomquist P, Israelsson LA. Small tissue bites and wound strength: an experimental study. Arch Surg 2001; 136: 272-275    DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.136.3.272    PMID: 11231844
  26. Henriksen NA, Deerenberg EB, Venclauskas L, Fortelny RH, Miserez M, Muysoms FE. Meta-analysis on materials and techniques for laparotomy closure: The MATCH review. World J Surg 2018; 42: 1666-1678    DOI: 10.1007/s00268-017-4393-9    PMID: 29322212
  27. Patel SV, Paskar DD, Nelson RL, Vedula SS, Steele SR. Closure methods for laparotomy incisions for preventing incisional hernias and other wound complications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 11: CD005661    DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005661.pub2    PMID: 29099149
  28. Diener MK, Voss S, Jensen K, Büchler MW, Seiler CM. Elective midline laparotomy closure: the INLINE systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2010; 251: 843-856    DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d973e4    PMID: 20395846
  29. Höer J, Klinge U, Schachtrupp A, Töns C, Schumpelick V. Influence of suture technique on laparotomy wound healing: an experimental study in the rat. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2001; 386: 218-223    DOI: 10.1007/s004230000196    PMID: 11382325
  30. Höer J, Anurov M, Titkova S, Klinge U, Töns C, Ottinger A, Schumpelick V. Influence of suture material and suture technique on collagen fibril diameters in midline laparotomies. Eur Surg Res 2000; 32: 359-367    DOI: 10.1159/000052218    PMID: 11182620
  31. Höer J, Töns C, Schachtrupp A, Anurov M, Titkova S, Oettinger A, Wetter O, et al. Quantitative evaluation of abdominal wall perfusion after different types of laparotomy closure using laser-fluorescence videography. Hernia 2002; 6: 11-16    DOI: 10.1007/s10029-002-0047-3    PMID: 12090573
  32. Höer JJ, Junge K, Schachtrupp A, Klinge U, Schumpelick V. Influence of laparotomy closure technique on collagen synthesis in the incisional region. Hernia 2002; 6: 93-98    DOI: 10.1007/s10029-002-0070-4    PMID: 12209295
  33. Yii E, Onggo J, Yii MK. Small bite versus large bite stitching technique for midline laparotomy wound closure: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Surg 2023; 46: 4719-4726    DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.08.124    PMID: 37652773
  34. Klink CD, Binnebösel M, Alizai HP, Lambertz A, Vontrotha KT, Junker E, et al. Tension of knotted surgical sutures shows tissue specific rapid loss in a rodent model. BMC Surg 2011; 11: 36    DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-11-36    PMID: 22188826

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Gastrointestinal Tract

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC