Skip to main content

Use of a Pfannenstiel incision in minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery is associated with a lower risk of wound complications

Techniques in Coloproctology volume 16, pages 127–132 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

The Pfannenstiel incision, widely used in gynecological surgery, has been reported to be associated with lower rates of wound complications than midline incisions in open surgery. However, its effect on wound complications in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is not well understood. We hypothesize that use of a Pfannenstiel incision in MIS colorectal cancer resections would be associated with fewer short-term wound complication rates.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed on 171 patients who had undergone MIS colorectal cancer surgery requiring a specimen extraction/hand-access site, divided into a Pfannenstiel and a midline group depending on the type of incision used. Wound complications compared included disruption, infection, dehiscence, evisceration, and fistula formation. The Mann–Whitney U and Fisher’s exact tests were used to analyze differences in risk factors between the groups. Logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with prevention of wound complications.

Results

Patients in the Pfannenstiel group had significantly lower rates of wound disruption (0 vs. 13%, p = 0.02), superficial surgical site infection (7 vs. 22%, p = 0.03), and overall wound complications (13 vs. 30%, p = 0.04). Using multivariate logistic regression, Pfannenstiel incisions and colon rather than rectal resections were significant predictors of prevention of wound complications.

Conclusions

The use of a Pfannenstiel incision in MIS colorectal cancer resections is associated with a decreased risk of short-term wound complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ (2004) Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 91:1111–1124

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Orenstein SB, Elliott HL, Reines LA, Novitsky YW (2010) Advantages of the hand-assisted versus the open approach to elective colectomies. Surg Endosc 25:1364–1368

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Brown SR, Goodfellow PB (2005) Transverse versus midline incisions for abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19(4):1–43

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kisielinski K, Conze J, Murken AH, Lenzen NN, Klinge U, Schumpelick V (2004) The Pfannenstiel or so called “bikini cut”: still effective more than 100 years after first description. Hernia 8:177–181

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bergamaschi R, Tuetch JJ, Pessaux P, Arnaud JP (2000) Intracorporeal vs laparoscopic-assisted resection for uncomplicated diverticulitis of the sigmoid. Surg Endosc 14:520–523

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang YJ, Marcello PW, Rusin LC, Roberts PL, Schoetz DJ (2005) Hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy: helping hand or hindrance? Surg Endosc 19:656–661

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bergamaschi R, Tuech JJ, Cervi C, Arnaud JP (2000) Re-establish pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic-assisted sigmoid resection? Randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 43:771–774

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Agha A, Moser C, Iesalnieks I, Piso P, Schlitt HJ (2008) Combination of hand-assisted and laparoscopic proctocolectomy (HALP): technical aspects, learning curve and early postoperative results. Surg Endosc 22:1547–1552

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Greene AK, Michetti P, Peppercorn MA, Hodin RA (2000) Laparoscopically assisted ileocolectomy for Crohn’s disease through a pfannenstiel incision. Am J Surg 180:238–240

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fowkes L, Krishna K, Menon A, Greenslade GL, Dixon AR (2008) Laparoscopic emergency and elective surgery for ulcerative colitis. Colorectal Dis 10:373–378

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Luijendijk RW, Jeekel J, Storm RK et al (1997) The low transverse Pfannenstiel incision and the prevalence of incisional hernia and nerve entrapment. Ann Surg 225:365–369

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI, Yaakovian MD, Haas EM (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy: a novel approach through a Pfannenstiel incision. Tech Coloproctol 15:61–65

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bratzler DW, Hunt DR (2006) The surgical infection prevention and surgical care improvement projects: national initiatives to improve outcomes for patients having surgery. Clin Infect Dis 43:322–330

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W et al (1998) The Department of Veterans Affairs’ NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA surgical quality improvement program. Ann Surg 228:491–507

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Halm JA, Lip H, Schmitz PI, Jeekel J (2009) Incisional hernia after upper abdominal surgery: a randomised controlled trial of midline versus transverse incision. Hernia 13:275–280

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Desouza A, Domajnko B, Park J, Marecik S, Prasad L, Abcarian H (2011) Incisional hernia, midline versus low transverse incision: what is the ideal incision for specimen extraction and hand-assisted laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 25:1031–1036

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Singh R, Omiccioli A, Hegge S, McKinley C (2008) Does the extraction-site location in laparoscopic colorectal surgery have an impact on incisional hernia rates? Surg Endosc 22:2596–2600

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Konishi T, Watanabe T, Kishimoto J, Nagawa H (2006) Elective colon and rectal surgery differ in risk factors for wound infection: results of prospective surveillance. Ann Surg 244:758–763

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Marijnen CA, Kapiteijn E, van de Velde CJ et al (2002) Acute side effects and complications after short-term preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision in primary rectal cancer: report of a multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 20:817–825

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gendall KA, Raniga S, Kennedy R, Frizelle FA (2007) The impact of obesity on outcome after major colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 50:2223–2237

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Balentine CJ, Wilks J, Robinson C et al (2010) Obesity increases wound complications in rectal cancer surgery. J Surg Res 163:35–39

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors have no disclosures to report. The authors acknowledge financial support and/or resources in the preparation of this manuscript from the Houston Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence (HF P90-020) at the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Conflict of interests

None.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, 1709 Dryden, Suite 1500, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    S. T. Orcutt, C. J. Balentine, C. L. Marshall, C. N. Robinson, D. A. Anaya, A. Artinyan, S. S. Awad, D. H. Berger & D. Albo

Authors
  1. S. T. Orcutt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. J. Balentine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. L. Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. N. Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. A. Anaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Artinyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. S. S. Awad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. D. H. Berger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. D. Albo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Albo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Orcutt, S.T., Balentine, C.J., Marshall, C.L. et al. Use of a Pfannenstiel incision in minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery is associated with a lower risk of wound complications. Tech Coloproctol 16, 127–132 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-012-0808-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-012-0808-7

Keywords

  • Pfannenstiel
  • Colorectal cancer
  • Wound complications
  • Minimally invasive