To Comparative Study of Continuous Intermittent Crossed Versus Continuous Suturing Techniques for Linea Alba Closure in Midline Exploratory Laparotomy at a Tertiary Care Centre

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluates intraoperative closure parameters and short-term postoperative outcomes comparing continuous intermittent crossed suturing to continuous suturing techniques for linea alba closure in midline exploratory laparotomy. Methods: This prospective randomized study total 60 patients undergoing midline exploratory laparotomy, divided into two equal groups: Group A underwent linea alba closure using continuous intermittent crossing suturing, while Group B received continuous suturing. Key metrics documented included baseline demographics, intraoperative closure duration, suture lengths, suture-to-wound length (S/W) ratio, and postoperative wound complications such as infection and dehiscence. Results: Total 60 patients 30 in each group. Male predominance in both groups, with females making up 30% in Group A and 33.33% in Group B, while males constituted 70% and 66.67%, respectively. The study compared two groups, Group A and Group B, with mean ages of 35.45± 13.54 years and 37.63± 16.77 years, respectively (p = 0.688). Group A had a slightly longer closure time averaging 24.88 ± 4.52 seconds compared to 22.38± 6.52 seconds in Group B (p = 0.68). Other parameters, including suture length, wound length, and the suture-to-wound ratio, showed no significant differences between the groups (p>0.05). Additionally, wound infection occurred in 16.67% of patients in both groups, while wound dehiscence was noted in 6.67% of patients in each cohort. Conclusion: Both wound closure methods assessed yielded similar short-term results. Continuous suturing led to slightly faster closure times, while continuous intermittent crossing suturing is also a viable choice, notably in high-risk cases. Further studies are needed to evaluate the rates of incisional hernias.