ScholarLens Back to search
1987•PubMedOpen access

A randomised comparison of polydioxanone (PDS) and polypropylene (Prolene) for abdominal wound closure.

A E P Cameron, Chris Parker, E S Field, RobertC Gray, A P Wyatt

Open full text 41 citations

Abstract

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.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

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.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 41 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

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.

Key concepts: Prolene, Medicine, Polydioxanone, Surgery, Abdominal wound, Asymptomatic, Laparotomy, Wound infection

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A randomised comparison of polydioxanone (PDS) and polypropylene (Prolene) for abdominal wound closure. — Research Paper | ScholarLens