Journal of Translational Medical Research

Background and Aim: Different methods for appendectomy operation wound repairs have been applied. The two common methods of the wound repair in suppurative phase of appendicitis are subcuticular and interrupted wound repair. There have been controversies on the benefit of each method. This Study was designed to compare the two methods of appendectomy wound repair on wound infection after suppurative appendectomy
Materials and Methods: Two hundred patients who had necessary conditions for participating in survey were divided randomly into 2 groups in 2003. In the first group, operational wounds were repaired by subcuticular method and in the second by interrupted transdermal technique. Then the patients in the two groups were visited by another surgeon unaware of the type of suturation at intervals of one week and one month after operation. The results on the rate and kind of wound infection, pus secretion, wound opening and systemic infections were compared by SPSS software using Chi-Square and fisher exact tests. P<0.05 was considered as the significant level.
Results: The mean age of patients in interrupted transdermal and subcuticular groups were 20.85±6.7 and 20.61±6.58 yrs (P=0.8), respectively. Sexes of the two groups were also similar with male dominating of 54% and 53% in transdermal and subcuticular groups, respectively (P=0.89). Local infection rates in subcuticular and transdermal group one week after surgeries were 9% and 6%, respectively (P=0.421). Rates of pus secretion and wound opening one week after surgery in subcuticular and transdermal group, were 5% and 4% respectively (P=0.99). No Systemic infection was found one week and one month after operation in both groups.
Conclusion: Sine there were no statistical significant differences between the two methods of subcuticular and interrupted transdermal wound repair in supportive appendectomy either of them could be used.

Background and Aims: Various therapies and surgeries are applied in heart valve surgery, including interrupted and semi-continuous suture techniques. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the clinical implications of two methods of interrupted and semi-continuous suture techniques during and after mitral or aortic valve replacement surgery among patients referred to Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Birjand University of Medical Sciences.
Materials and Methods: In this study, the required information of patients was collected through the checklist based on the objectives of the study. The subjects had undergone aortic or mitral valve replacement for heart valve replacement suturing with continuous or interrupted suturing techniques. The patients' records were examined to investigate the complications, and in case that the required information was not registered, the patient or his relatives were also contacted so that the patient could be examined and referred to the hospital by the patient's surgeon.
Results: The mean age scores of patients undergoing surgery in the continuous and interrupted suture groups were obtained as 53.06±13.48 and 52.86±12.97 years, respectively. It was revealed that there was a large distribution of heart valve leakage, arrhythmia, heart attack, valve infection, involved valve type, and aortic and mitral valve size in the two groups; however, there was no significant difference (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, the rate of cardiac function and complications caused by the two techniques of continuous and interrupted suturing were not significantly different from each other; therefore, these two methods were not superior to each other due to the mentioned cases.