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. Issue 7 (28th June 2010)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: van den Baar, Mark T M; van der Palen, Job; Vroon, Marianne I; Bertelink, Paul; Hendrix, Ron
• Is Part Of: Emergency medicine journal. Volume 27:Issue 7(2010)
• Page Start: 540
• Page End: 543
• Publication Date: 2010-06-28
• Subjects: Wounds -- Friedrich -- wound closure -- 6 h; Emergency medicine -- Periodicals; 616.02505
• DOI: 10.1136/emj.2009.075846
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1472-0205

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The dogma that traumatic wounds should not be sutured after 6 h is based on an animal experiment by P L Friedrich in 1898. There is no adequately powered prospective study on this cut-off of 6 h to confirm or disprove the dogma. The aim of this study was to provide evidence against the dogma that wounds should be sutured within 6 h after trauma. Method: 425 patients were included in a prospective cohort study. Patients' wounds were closed, independent of time after trauma. All patients were seen after 7–10 days for removal of stitches and wound control on infection. Results: Of the 425 patients, 17 were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 408 patients, 45 had wounds older than 6 h after trauma. At follow-up 372 patients (91%) had no infection and 36 patients had redness of the suture sites or worse. 11 patients (2.7%) had general redness or pus. Of those with a wound older than 6 h, three of 45 (6.7%) wounds were infected, versus 30 of 363 (9.1%) in wounds younger than 6 h (p=0.59). Conclusion: In everyday practice wounds are sutured regardless of elapsed time. Here an attempt was made to present the evidence for this daily routine, contrary to Friedrich's Dogma.