P047 SUTURE-TOOL: A SUTURING DEICE FOR SWIFT AND STANDARDIZED ABDOMINAL APONEUROSIS CLOSURE

Aim Introduction Surgeons can reduce incisional hernia formation by adhering to standardized techniques for incisional wound closure. This is often neglected by the time a long operation is to be ended and can lead to the risk of developing an incisional hernia or a wound rupture. To address this issue, a suturing machine (Suture-TOOL) was developed for swift and standardized abdominal closure. The aim was to compare the user safety, speed, and suturing quality between Suture-TOOL and manual Needle-Driver suturing. Material and Methods Fifteen surgeons who were specialists in surgery, urology, and gynaecology as well as surgical trainees were invited. The Suture-TOOL was presented to the surgeons who read the instructions for use before starting the test. Each surgeon closed nine 15-cm-long incisions in a human body model; six with Suture-TOOL and three with the Needle-Driver technique. Gloves were examined for puncture damage. Endpoints were suture-length/wound-length (SL/WL)-ratio, closure time, number of stitches, learning curve, and glove puncture rate. A VAS-evaluation concerning different Suture-TOOL user impressions was completed. Results SL/WL-ratio ≥4 was 98% for Suture-TOOL versus 69% for Needle-Driver (p < 0,001). Suture time was shorter for Suture-TOOL (p = 0,013). The median SL/WL-ratio was similar between the groups. The learning curve plateaued after three closures using Suture-TOOL. Two glove punctures were detected—all in the Needle-Driver group. Suture-TOOL received high VAS scores for all measured functionalities. Conclusions Suture-TOOL is a promising device for clinical use. It is safe, easy, and fast resulting in a high-quality suture lines with a short learning curve and a high functionality ranking.

A Novel Radiotherapy Approach for Keloids with Intrabeam

Background. Keloids are hard nodules or plaques formed by excessive proliferation of connective tissue. Radiotherapy, widely used in various benign and malignant skin diseases, is an effective treatment for keloids. This work evaluates Intrabeam photon radiotherapy in the management of keloids. Methods. Fourteen patients who have undergone Intrabeam radiotherapy for a total of 15 sites of keloids were followed up. Twelve cases were first onset and the other two had recurrent diseases. Thirteen patients underwent surgical resection of keloids before radiotherapy. One relapsing patient received only 2 rounds of radiation therapy as she could not be reoperated. Radiotherapy was divided into 2 sessions on days 0 and 3 after surgery. The dose was 4 or 5 Gy each time for 3 min 14 s to 12 min 1 s. In addition, we compared our data to the recurrence of keloids in fourteen patients who had previously been exposed to electron beam using conventional accelerators. Results. We analyzed the treatment for adverse reactions and recurrence. In the Intrabeam group, one patient developed superficial skin ulcers a month after treatment. No one experienced wound rupture, bleeding, infection, skin contractures, or obvious hyperpigmentation. None of the fourteen cases showed any recurrence so far after on median 22.5 months of follow-up. Five patients in the electron beam group relapsed 3 to 10 months after treatment. Conclusion. Here, Intrabeam photon radiotherapy was shown to be an effective treatment for keloid scars and it is therefore recommended for management of this disease.