System INSORB® - stapler + wchłanialne zszywki
Opatentowany stapler do skóry INSORB® to sterylne urządzenie do jednorazowego użytku, które wykorzystuje 30 wchłanialnych zszywek, wystarczających do zamknięcia nacięcia o długości do 21 cm.
Zaawansowana konstrukcja Staplera INSORB® pozwala w łatwy sposób uchwycić i zamknąć skórę właściwą od spodu, co minimalizuje wielkość powstałej blizny.
Wchłanialne zszywki wykonane z biodegradowalnych polimerów tworzą tzw. podskórne rusztowanie co pozwala na szybsze, mniej bolesne i symetryczne zespojenie rany.
Igły Staplera INSORB® nakłuwają tkankę podskórnie po obu stronach rany
W miejsce igieł umieszczona zostaje automatycznie wchłanialna zszywka, która uchwyca tkankę od spodu
Absorbowalne zszywki zapewniają integralność zamykanej rany
Wchłanialne zszywki wykonane z biodegradowalnych polimerów
Zalety stosowania systemu INSORB:
Zwiększa precyzję łączenia brzegów rany, co poprawia proces jej gojenia
Skraca czas operacji
Zmniejsza powierzchnię blizny dzięki minimalizacji napięcia na krawędzi rany
Eliminuje koszty, niedogodności dla pacjenta, oraz dyskomfort związany z przezskórnym usuwaniem metalowych zszywek
Minimalizuje ryzyko powikłań w stosunku do zastosowania zszywek metalowych
Eliminuje ryzyko zranienia igłą w momencie zamykania rany
Odstępy między zszywkami zapewniają drogę do naturalnego drenażu rany
Dotychczas opublikowano wiele badań prezentujących wyniki stosowania INSORB® stapler system. Poniżej artykuły poruszający kwestie zmniejszenia ryzyka powikłań dzięki zastosowaniu systemu oraz jego zalety.
1.
Placement of Absorbable Dermal Staples in Mammaplasty and Abdominoplasty: A 12-Month Prospective Study of 60 Patients Thierry Bron, MD and Gilbert Zakine, MD, PhD Aesthetic Surgery Journal 2015, 1–10 © 2015 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjv224 www.aestheticsurgeryjournal.com Abstract Background: The duration to close an incision is an important consideration in plastic surgery. The placement of Insorb absorbable subcuticular staples (Insorb, Incisive Surgical, Plymouth, MN) may allow for a decreased closure time compared with other modalities. Objectives: The authors evaluated the utility of Insorb staples for the closure of mammaplasty and abdominoplasty incisions. Methods: Sixty patients who underwent anterior abdominal dermatolipectomy, total circular abdominal dermatolipectomy, bilateral breast reduction, or bilateral mastopexy were evaluated in a prospective study. Dermal closure was achieved on 1 side of each patient with Insorb absorbable staples and on the other with absorbable monofilament sutures. Scar quality, pruritus, and pain were scored according to a modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS) at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Results: Closure with absorbable staples was approximately 7-fold faster than closure with absorbable sutures for all surgical procedures. No significant differences in mVSS scores were noted between incisions closed with staples vs sutures. Conclusions: Absorbable staples enable faster closure of a surgical incision without compromising scar quality or patient comfort.
2.
Incidence of wound complications in cesarean deliveries following closure with absorbable subcuticular staples versus conventional skin closure techniques
T.L. Schrufer-Polanda, M.P. Ruiza, S. Kassara, Ch. Tomassiana,S.D. Algrenb, J.D. Yeastc
University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine, MO, United States
A B S T R A C T Objective: To determine if there is a significant difference in composite wound complications among traditional closure techniques versus absorbable subcuticular staple closure. Study design: This study is a retrospective cohort study of cesarean sections performed from January through September of 2014. Composite wound complications included surgical site infection, separation, and fluid collection. Medical records were reviewed and data including the patient demographics, comorbidities, closure type and wound complications were recorded. Patients with incomplete data were excluded. Data were analyzed with ANOVA or Fisher exact test, according to data type. Results: Of the 186 patients identified,176 patients were included in the data analysis (n = 83 suture, n = 49 traditional staple, n = 44 the absorbable subcuticular staple). The groups were similar in all demographic categories; labor prior to delivery, estimated blood loss, and medical and pregnancy related comorbidities. The overall incidence of wound complications at our institution during this study was 5.7%. The incidence of complications among the suture and subcuticular staple closure was not significantly different (3.6% versus 0%, p = 0.3), however there were significantly less complications in the suture and subcuticular staple closure groups when compared to traditional staple closure (14.3%) (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively). Conclusion: Herein, we report a decreased incidence of composite wound complications with subcuticular staple closure versus traditional staple closure in patients undergoing cesarean section. Absorbable subcuticular staple closure represents a convenient, safe and cost-effective closure technique.
Comments