Failure of primary closure predicts prolonged length of stay in gastroschisis patients

Saunders Lin, Caroline Stephens, Aaron Cunningham, Nicholas Hamilton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)77-83
Number of pages7
JournalPediatric Surgery International
Volume37
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2021

Keywords

  • Gastroschisis
  • Primary closure
  • Silo

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Failure of primary closure predicts prolonged length of stay in gastroschisis patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this