CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

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

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.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app