Abstract
Aim and objectives The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) rates in abdominal wound closure utilizing antibacterial-coated (triclosan-coated) suture material versus conventional suture material with subcutaneous antibacterial infiltration along the incision line. Materials and method This prospective and comparative (randomized, non-blinded clinical trial) was conducted at the Postgraduate Department of Surgery, Swaroop Rani Nehru Hospital, associated with Motilal Nehru Medical College, Prayagraj, India. The sample size was calculated to be one hundred. The patients in Group A underwent laparotomy using polyglactin 910 coated with triclosan. The patients in Group B underwent normal suture closure and local infiltration of broad-spectrum antibiotics (1 gram of ceftriaxone in 10 ml distilled water, along with the incision). Results There was no discernible difference between the various groups on postoperative day (POD) 14, 21, and 30. In Group A, 100.0% of individuals had healed wound status (POD 30). Group B had healed wound status among the 96.0% of members (POD 30). Twenty percent of the people in Group A had SSI whereas 38.0% of the participants in Group B had SSI. There was no discernible difference between the two groups regarding the distribution of culture (χ² = 7.741, p = 0.127). Conclusion Triclosan-coated sutures are more effective than subcutaneous antibiotic infiltration along the incision line in lowering the frequency of SSI during primary laparotomy wound closure.