Failure of primary closure predicts prolonged length of stay in gastroschisis patients
link.springer.com shows its articles on its own site.
Read the article on link.springer.com ↗Article · Nov 2020 · 1 min read
In brief
In brief
Retrospective study of 68 gastroschisis patients demonstrates that successful primary closure significantly reduces hospital length of stay and time to enteral feeding compared to failed closure requiring silo placement. Primary closure proved safe with minimal complications (4.44%) and superior resource utilization outcomes.
Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.
Abstract
Purpose
Current literature regarding outcomes of gastroschisis closure methods do not highlight differences in patients who successfully undergo primary closure with those who fail and require silo placement. We hypothesize that failure of primary closure has significant effects on clinical outcomes such as length of stay and time to enteral feeding.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective review between 2009 and 2018 of gastroschisis patients at a tertiary pediatric referral hospital. We compared patients successfully undergoing primary closure to patients who failed an initial primary closure attempt. Bivariate and multivariate linear regression models were used to assess the association of closure method on clinical outcomes.
Results
Sixty-eight neonates were included for analysis, with 44 patients who underwent primary closure and 24 who failed primary closure. On multivariate regression analysis, primary closure patients had shorter estimated time to starting and to full enteral feeds and decreased LOS as compared to those who failed primary closure. Two patients (4.44%) had complications related to primary closure.
Conclusion
Patients able to undergo primary closure for gastroschisis were more likely to have a shorter length of stay, shorter time to enteral feeds, and use much fewer medical resources. Initial primary closure is a safe method for most patients.