Prevenção de deiscência da aponeurose com uso profilático de tela pré-aponeurótica em laparotomias de emergência: ensaio clínico randomizado

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Emergency laparotomies have a high risk of complication with reports of fascial dehiscence (FD) in up to 14.9% of cases. The use of onlay mesh in the closure of abdominal wall reduces incidence of incisional hernia after elective surgeries without increased morbidity. However, there are no studies demonstrating its benefit in FD prevention and its use is controversial in emergency laparotomies and in contaminated or infected surgeries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the use of onlay mesh in the closure of the abdominal wall reduces the incidence of FD in patients submitted to emergency laparotomy, as well as the morbidity of its application. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo. Patients at high risk for FD and indication of emergency midline laparotomy were randomized either to the suture group (running suture with polidioxanone thread and 36 mm needle size, aiming to achieve suture-to-wound length ratio of 4:1) or to the prophylactic mesh group (fascial closure as in the suture group, reinforced with polypropylene onlay mesh). High risk was defined according to the adapted Rotterdam preoperative risk model. The surgical team was blinded to the groups during the intraoperative period (randomization occurred only after complete fascial suture). RESULTS: From June 2015 to February 2018, 145 patients were randomized, 30 of whom were excluded (20.7%) because of death or reoperation, not related to the mesh procedure, in the first 30 days; 52 were allocated in the suture group and 63 in the prophylactic mesh group. Both groups were equivalent for demographic data and clinical characteristics, except for age, whose mean was higher in the suture group (66.1 years vs 61.0 years, p = 0.03). Patients were classified as ASA III or IV in 44 (38.3%) cases. Among the operations, 49 (42.6%) were contaminated or infected, 63 (54,8%) involved ostomy formation and 89 (77.4%) were colorectal surgeries. Hospital length of stay (LOS) and intensive care unit LOS were similar. Mean operative time was 50.8 minutes longer in the prophylactic mesh group (p = 0.01). FD occurred in seven cases of the suture group (13.5%) and none in the prophylactic mesh group (p = 0.003). There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding the number of patients with surgical site occurrence (SSO) [15 (28.8%) vs 27 (42.9%), p = 0.12], or surgical site occurrences that required procedural interventions (SSOPI) [9 (17.3%) vs 14 (22.2%), p = 0.51]. However, some SSO were more frequent in the prophylactic mesh group: seroma [3 (5.8%) vs 12 (19.0%), p = 0.03], surgical site infection (SSI) [4 (7, 7%) vs 13 (20.6%), p = 0.05] and superficial wound dehiscence [3 (5.8%) vs 15 (23.8%), p = 0.008)]. Seven cases of the prophylactic mesh group had superficial wound dehiscence with mesh exposure, treated with local dressings and healing by second intention, with complete resolution in less than 90 days. No case required complete removal of mesh. Of ...