Plastic wound protectors do not affect wound infection rates following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy

  • K. W. Kercher
  • T. H. Nguyen
  • K. L. Harold
  • M. E. Poplin
  • B. D. Matthews
  • R. F. Sing
  • B. T. HenifordEmail author
Original article


Background: Wound protectors are plastic sheaths that can be used to line a wound during surgery. Wound protectors can facilitate retraction of an incision without the need for other mechanical retractors and have been proposed as deterrents to wound infection. The purpose of this study was to define the ability of wound protectors to reduce the rate of infection when used in laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. Methods: We completed a retrospective review of the medical records of patients undergoing nonemergent laparoscopic-assisted colectomy between February 1999 and November 2002. All completely laparoscopic cases were excluded. The wound protector, when used, was applied to the extraction incision during the externalized portion of the procedure (colon and mesentery transection, anastomosis). Outcomes for patients with and without the use of a wound protector were compared. Results: A total of 141 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (98 for benign/malignant tumors, 35 for diverticular disease, and eight for Crohn’s disease). There were no differences between the wound protector group (n = 84) and the no wound protector group (n = 57) with respect to mean age (55 vs 58 years), average body mass index (27 vs 29 kg/m2), gender, indication for surgery, comorbidities, antibiotics used, or mean operative time (185 vs 173 min). Nine patients in the wound protector group and eight in the no wound protector group developed a wound infection at the colon extraction site (p = 0.42). Patients undergoing resection for Crohn’s disease or diverticulitis had a higher infection rate (18.6%) than patients undergoing resection for polyps or cancer (9.2%; p < 0.05). No wound recurrence of cancer was observed in either group at a mean follow-up of 23 months (range, 3–48). Conclusions: The wound protector, although useful for mechanical retraction of small wounds, does not significantly diminish the rate of wound infection at the bowel resection/anastomotic site. Patients undergoing elective resection for inflammatory processes have higher infection rates than patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for polyps or cancer.


Laparascopic colectomy Wound infection Wound protector 


  1. 1.
    French, ML, Eitzen, HE, Ritter, MA 1976The plastic surgical adhesive drape: an evaluation of its efficacy as a microbial barrier.Ann Surg1844650PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    HALS Study Group2000Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery vs standard laparoscopy for colorectal disease.Surg Endosc14896901Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harrower, HW 1968Isolation of incisions into body cavities.Am J Surg116824826PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jackson, DW, Pollock, AV, Tindal, DS 1971The value of a plastic adhesive drape in the prevention of wound infection. A controlled trial.Br J Surg58340342PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nakagoe, T, Sawai, T, Tsuji, T, Nanashima, A, Jibiki, M, Yamaguchi, H, Yasutake, T, Ayabe, H, Shimomura, K 2001Minilaparotomy wound edge protector (Lap-Protector): a new device.Surg Today31850852CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nystrom, PO, Brote, L 1980Effects of a plastic wound drape on contamination with enterobacteria and on infection after appendicectomy.Acta Chir Scand1466570PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peacock, JL, Lawrence, WT, Peacock, EE 1993.O’Leary, JP eds. The physiologic basis of surgery.Williams & WilkinsBaltimore95111Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Psaila, JV, Wheeler, MH, Crosby, DL 1977The role of plastic wound drapes in the prevention of wound infection following abdominal surgery.Br J Surg64729732PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Raahave, D 1976Effect of plastic skin and wound drapes on the density of bacteria in operation wounds.BrJ Surg63421426Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sookhai, S, Redmond, HP, Deasy, JM 1999Impervious wound-edge protector to reduce postoperative wound infection: a randomised, controlled trial.Lancet3531585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stocchi, L, Nelson, H 2000Wound recurrences following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for cancer.Arch Surg135948958CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Targarona, EM, Gracia, E, Garriga, J, Martinez-Bru, ., Cotes, M, Boluda, R, Lerma, L, Trias, M 2002Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy.Surg Endosc16234239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weeks, JC, Nelson, H, Gelber, S, Sargent, D, Schroeder, G 2002Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trial.J Am Med Assoc287321329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Williams, JA, Oates, GD, Brown, PP, Burden, DW, McCall, J, Hutchison, AG, Lees, LJ 1972Abdominal wound infections and plastic wound guards.Br J Surg59142146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zoutman, D, McDonald, S, Vethanayagan, D 1998Total and attributable costs of surgical-wound infections at a Canadian tertiary care center.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol19254259Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. W. Kercher
    • 1
  • T. H. Nguyen
    • 1
  • K. L. Harold
    • 1
  • M. E. Poplin
    • 1
  • B. D. Matthews
    • 1
  • R. F. Sing
    • 1
  • B. T. Heniford
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of General SurgeryCarolinas Medical Center, 1000 Blythe Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28203USA

Personalised recommendations