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
. 2022 Dec 19:35:e1709.
doi: 10.1590/0102-672020220002e1709. eCollection 2022.

COMPARISON BETWEEN OSTOMY CLOSURE USING PURSE-STRING VERSUS LINEAR IN CHILDREN

Shahnam Askarpour  1   2 , Mehran Peyvasteh  1 , Farbod Farhadi  1 , Hazhir Javaherizadeh  2
Affiliations

COMPARISON BETWEEN OSTOMY CLOSURE USING PURSE-STRING VERSUS LINEAR IN CHILDREN

Shahnam Askarpour et al. Arq Bras Cir Dig. .

Abstract
in English, Portuguese

Background: Type of ostomy closure has connection with some complications and also cosmetic effects.

Aims: This study aimed to compare result of colostomy closure using purse-string method versus linear method in terms of surgical site infection, surgical time, and patient satisfaction.

Methods: In this study, 50 patients who underwent purse-string ostomy closure and 50 patients who underwent linear closure were included. Two groups were compared for surgical time, wound infection, patient satisfaction, scar length. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results: Wound infection was not reported among purse-string group compared to 10% in linear group (p=0.022). Scar length was 24.09±0.1 mm in purse string and 52.15±1.0 mm in linear group (p=0.033). Duration of hospital admission was significantly shorter in purse-string group (6.4±1.1 days) compared to linear (15.5±4.6 days, p=0.0001). The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scale for observer (p=0.038) and parents (p=0.045) was more favorable among purse-string group compared to linear.

Conclusion: Purse-string technique has the less frequent surgical site infection, shorter duration of hospital admission, less scar length, and more favorable cosmetic outcome, compared to linear technique.

RACIONAL:: A técnica de fechamento da ostomia tem relação com algumas complicações e também efeitos estéticos.

OBJETIVOS:: Comparar o resultado do fechamento da colostomia pelo método em bolsa versus método linear, em termos de infecção do sítio cirúrgico, tempo cirúrgico e satisfação do paciente.

MÉTODOS:: Foram incluídos 50 pacientes que não realizaram o fechamento da estomia em bolsa e 50 pacientes que foram submetidos ao fechamento linear. Os dois grupos foram comparados quanto ao tempo cirúrgico, infecção da ferida, satisfação do paciente, comprimento da cicatriz. Valor de p menor que 0,05 foi considerado significativo.

RESULTADOS:: A infecção da ferida não foi registrado no grupo de bolsa, em comparação com 10% no grupo linear (p=0,022). O comprimento da cicatriz foi de 24,09±0,1 mm no grupo de bolsa e 52,15±1,0 mm no grupo linear (p=0,033). O tempo de hospitalização foi significativamente menor no grupo em bolsa (6,4±1,1 dias) em comparação ao linear (15,5±4,6 dias, p=0,0001). A escala Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale para observador (p=0,038) e pais (p=0,045) foi mais favorável entre o grupo em bolsa, em relação ao linear.

CONCLUSÕES:: A técnica em bolsa apresentou infecção do sítio cirúrgico menos frequente, menor tempo de internação, menor comprimento da cicatriz e resultado cosmético mais favorável, em comparação com a técnica linear.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: None

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Surgical wound following colostomy closure using purse-string method at (A) 0 day and (B) 1 year.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Closure using linear technique at (A) 0 day and (B) 1 year.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alvandipour M, Gharedaghi B, Khodabakhsh H, Karami MY. Purse-string versus linear conventional skin wound closure of an ileostomy: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Coloproctol. 2016;32(4):144–149. doi: 10.3393/ac.2016.32.4.144. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bischoff A, Levitt MA, Lawal TA, Peña A. Colostomy closure: how to avoid complications. Pediatr Surg Int. 2010;26(11):1087–1092. doi: 10.1007/s00383-010-2690-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Çiğdem MK, Onen A, Duran H, Öztürk H, Otçu S. The mechanical complications of colostomy in infants and children: analysis of 473 cases of a single center. Pediatr Surg Int. 2006;22(8):671–676. doi: 10.1007/s00383-006-1718-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Draaijers LJ, Tempelman FRH, Botman YAM, Tuinebreijer WE, Middelkoop E, Kreis RW, et al. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113(7):1960–1965. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000122207.28773.56. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Durani P, McGrouther DA, Ferguson MW. The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire: a reliable and valid patient-reported outcomes measure for linear scars. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;123(5):1481–1489. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181a205de. - DOI - PubMed