Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Oct 22;2013(10):CD008574.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008574.pub3.

Primary closure versus delayed closure for non bite traumatic wounds within 24 hours post injury

Martha C Eliya-Masamba  1 , Grace W Banda
Affiliations

Primary closure versus delayed closure for non bite traumatic wounds within 24 hours post injury

Martha C Eliya-Masamba et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Acute traumatic wounds are one of the common reasons why people present to the emergency department. Primary closure has traditionally been reserved for traumatic wounds presenting within six hours of injury and considered 'clean' by the attending surgeon, with the rest undergoing delayed primary closure as a means of controlling wound infection. Primary closure has the potential benefit of rapid wound healing but poses the potential threat of increased wound infection. There is currently no evidence to guide clinical decision-making on the best timing for closure of traumatic wounds.

Objectives: To determine the effect on time to healing of primary closure versus delayed closure for non bite traumatic wounds presenting within 24 hours post injury. To explore the adverse effects of primary closure compared with delayed closure for non bite traumatic wounds presenting within 24 hours post injury.

Search methods: In May 2013, for this first update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing primary closure with delayed closure of non bite traumatic wounds.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently evaluated the results of the searches against the inclusion criteria. No studies met the inclusion criteria for this review.

Main results: Since no studies met the inclusion criteria, neither a meta-analysis nor a narrative description of studies was possible.

Authors' conclusions: There is currently no systematic evidence to guide clinical decision-making regarding the timing for closure of traumatic wounds. There is a need for robust research to investigate the effect of primary closure compared with delayed closure for non bite traumatic wounds presenting within 24 hours of injury.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Update of

References

References to studies excluded from this review

De Long 1999 {published data only}
    1. Long WG Jr, Born CT, Wei SY, Petrik ME, Schwab CW. Aggressive treatment of 119 open fracture wounds. Journal of Trauma 1999;46(6):1049‐54. - PubMed
Kamwendo 2002 {published data only}
    1. Kamwendo NY, Modiba MC, Matlala NS, Becker PJ. Randomised clinical trial to determine if delay from time of penetrating colonic injury precludes primary repair. British Journal of Surgery 2002;89(8):993‐8. - PubMed
Maimaris 1988 {published data only}
    1. Maimaris C, Quinton DN. Dog bite lacerations: a controlled trail of primary wound closure. Archives of Emergency Medicine 1988;5(3):156‐61. - PMC - PubMed
Nordenstam 2008 {published data only}
    1. Nordenstam J, Mellgren A, Altman D, Lopez A, Johansson C, Anzen B, et al. Immediate or delayed repair of obstetric anal sphincter tears ‐ a randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2008;115(7):857‐65. - PubMed
van de Baar 2010 {published data only}
    1. Baar MTM, Palen J, Vroon MI, Bertelink P, Hendrix R. Is time to closure a factor in the occurrence of infection in traumatic wounds? A prospective cohort study in a Dutch level 1 trauma centre. Emergency Medicine Journal 2010;27(7):540‐3. - PubMed

Additional references

Baker 1990
    1. Baker MD, Lanuti M. The management and outcome of lacerations in urban children. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1990;19(9):1001‐5. - PubMed
Berk 1988
    1. Berk WA, Osbourne DD, Taylor DD. Evaluation of the "golden period" for wound repair: 204 cases from third world emergency department. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1988;17(5):496‐500. - PubMed
Dorland 2003
    1. Dorland, NW. Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary. 30th Edition. Philadelphia: W.B Saunders Company, 2003.
Dyson 2003
    1. Dyson M, Moodley S, Verjee L, Verling W, Weinman J, Wilson P. Wound healing assessment using 20MHz ultrasound and photography. Skin Research and Technology 2003;9(2):116‐21. - PubMed
Faisham 2001
    1. Faisham WI, Nordin S, Aidura A. Bacteriological study and its role in the management of open tibial fractures. Medical Journal of Malaysia 2001;56(2):201‐6. - PubMed
Garner 1985
    1. Garner JS. Guideline for prevention of surgical wound infections. Hospital Infections Program Centres for Infectious Diseases Centre for Disease Control 1985.
Godina 1986
    1. Godina M. Early microsurgical reconstruction of complex trauma of the extremities. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1986;78(3):285‐92. - PubMed
Harley 2002
    1. Harley BJ, Beaupre LA, Jones AC, Dulai SK, Weber DW. The effect of time to definitive treatment on the rate of non union and infection in open fractures. Journal of Orthopedic Trauma 2002;16(7):484‐90. - PubMed
Higgins 2009
    1. Higgins JPT and Altman DG on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and the Cochrane Bias Methods Group (Editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2009. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Hohmann 2007
    1. Hohmann E, Tetsworth K, Radziejowski MJ, Wiesniewski TF. Comparison of delayed and primary wound closure in the treatment of open tibial fractures. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2007;127(2):131‐6. - PubMed
Hollander 1995
    1. Hollander JE, Singer AJ, Valentine S, Henry MC. Wound registry: development and validation. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1995;25(5):475–85. - PubMed
Hollander 1999
    1. Hollander JE, Singer AJ. Laceration management. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1999;34(3):356‐67. - PubMed
Kumar 2005
    1. Kumar S. Classification and management of acute wounds. Surgery (Oxford) 2005;23(2):47‐51.
Lee 2009
    1. Lee CK, Hansen SL. Management of acute wounds. Surgical Clinics of North America 2009;89(3):659‐76. - PubMed
Lefebvre 2011
    1. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J, on behalf of the Cochrane Information Retrieval Methods Group. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
Lorenz 2008
    1. Lorenz P, Longaker MT. Wounds: biology, pathology and management. In: Norton JA, Barie PS, Bollinger RR, Chang AE, Lowry SF, Mulvihill SJ, et al. editor(s). Surgery: Basic Science and clinical Evidence. New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC, 2008:191‐205.
McLatchie 2002
    1. McLatchie GR, Limper DJ. Oxford Handbook of Clinical Surgery. 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press, 2002.
Morgan 1980
    1. Morgan WJ, Hutchison D, Johnson HM. The delayed treatment of wounds of the hand and forearm under antibiotic cover. British Journal of Surgery 1980;67(2):140‐1. - PubMed
RevMan 2008 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.0. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
Rippon 1999
    1. Rippon MG, Springett K, Walmsley R. Ultrasound evaluation of acute experimental and chronic clinical wounds. Skin Research and Technology 1999;5(4):228‐36.
Robert 2006
    1. Cleary RK, Pomerantz RA, Lampman RM. Colon and rectal injuries. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum 2006;49(8):1203‐22. - PubMed
Scherping 2007
    1. Scherping SC Jr, Aaron AD. Orthopaedic infections. In: Wiesel SW, Delahay JN editor(s). Essentials of Orthopaedic Surgery. 3rd Edition. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, LLC, 2007:84‐105.
SIGN 2010
    1. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Search filters. http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/filters.html#random (accessed 21 April 2010).
Silbert 1981
    1. Sibert JR, Maddocks GB, Brown BM. Childhood accidents ‐ an endemic of epidemic proportion. Archives of Disease in Childhood 1981;56(3):225‐7. - PMC - PubMed
Velmahos 2002
    1. Velmahos GC, Vassiliu P, Demetriades D, Chan LS, Murray J, Salim A, et al. Wound management after colon injury: open or closed? A prospective randomised trial. American Surgeon 2002;68(9):795‐801. - PubMed
Weitz‐Marshall 2002
    1. Weitz‐Marshall AD, Bosse MJ. Timing of closure of open fractures. Journal of American Academic Orthopedic Surgery 2002;10(6):379‐84. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources