Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
The MESH-RTL Project for prevention of abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) in high-risk patients: noninferiority, randomized controlled trial
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
The MESH-RTL Project for prevention of abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) in high-risk patients: noninferiority, randomized controlled trial
Do you wish to request the book?
The MESH-RTL Project for prevention of abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) in high-risk patients: noninferiority, randomized controlled trial
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
The MESH-RTL Project for prevention of abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) in high-risk patients: noninferiority, randomized controlled trial
2024
Overview
PurposeTo compare reinforced tension line (RTL) and mesh techniques in the onlay position for preventing abdominal wound dehiscence (AWD) in a noninferiority clinical trial.MethodsPatients > 18 years old who underwent midline laparotomy and who were considered at high risk on the modified Rotterdam risk scale were included. The outcomes analyzed were the incidence of AWD and surgical site occurrence (SSO).Results239 patients were included: 121 mesh group and 118 RTL group. Five (4.1%) of the 121 patients in the mesh group and 7 (5.9%) of the 118 patients in the RTL group presented with AWD (p = 0.56, RR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.22–2.13) in the per-protocol analysis. The median time of presentation was 6 days. The 95% CI (−0.0567, 0.0231) for the difference in incidence between the two groups was entirely within the predefined noninferiority margin of 5%. The incidence of complications did not significantly differ between the two groups: the mesh group (27, 22.3%) and the RTL group (16, 12.8%) (p = 0.09, RR (95% CI) = 1.64 (0.93–2.89)).ConclusionThe use of the RTL technique for preventing AWD was not inferior to the use of mesh in the onlay position, nor did it increase the risk of complications. This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov: Mesh-RTL Project (NCT04134455).
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.