The Effect of Fascial Closure With Triclosan-Coated Sutures on the Incidence of Abdominal Wall Dehiscence: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: Wound closure with triclosan-coated sutures (TCS) appears to reduce the risk of surgical site infection (SSI). Because there is a strong association between postoperative SSI and the development of acute abdominal wall dehiscence (AWD) after laparotomy, we hypothesized that the use of TCS for wound closure after laparotomy may also reduce the risk of AWD. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched from their inception to 01 November 2022. Randomized trials that compared the use of TCS with identical but uncoated sutures for fascial closure were eligible if they could provide individual participant data (IPD) on AWD. From these trials, we only included in the analysis those subjects who underwent open abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of AWD within 30 days postoperatively, requiring emergency reoperation. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology (PROSPERO: CRD42019121173. Results: We identified twelve eligible trials. Eight studies shared IPD. The incidence of AWD within 30 days after surgery was 27/1,565 (1.7%) in the TCS group vs. 40/1,430 (2.8%) in the control group (Relative Risk: 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-1.11, I 2 = 0%, τ2 = 0.00]). The certainty of evidence was moderate after downgrading for imprecision. The incidence of incisional SSI was 163/1,576 (10.3%) vs. 198/1,439 (13.8%), RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.67-0.97). Conclusion: We found no conclusive evidence to support the use of triclosan-coated sutures for the prevention of acute abdominal wall dehiscence after laparotomy. In these selected studies, a significant reduction in incisional SSI was observed.

An Analysis of the Impact of Intra-abdominal Pressure on Surgical Outcomes in Cases of Intestinal Obstruction: A Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The decision and timing of surgical exploration of intestinal obstruction depend on the clinical findings and probable etiology of the symptoms. Patients with intestinal obstruction often have intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH), which is associated with a poor prognosis. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the surgical outcomes in patients with intestinal obstruction in relation to intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on 50 patients with intestinal obstruction undergoing surgery. Preoperatively, IAP was measured in all the patients and was allocated into two groups based on the presence or absence of IAP. Patients were assessed for the postoperative length of hospital or ICU stay, surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, and recovery following surgery. RESULTS: The patients with preoperative IAH had significantly longer postoperative stays, with a median stay of eight days in these patients compared to four days in patients without IAH (p=0.009). A significantly higher number of patients (24%) had gangrenous changes on the bowel wall (p=0.042) and fascial dehiscence (p=0.018) in the group associated with raised IAP. A total of 75% of patients who required ventilator support belonged to the raised IAP group. The mean IAP in patients admitted to the ICU was significantly higher than in patients not admitted to the ICU (p=0.027). CONCLUSION: Preoperative IAH in intestinal obstruction is a significant factor in predicting the possibility of bowel ischemia with gangrene, perforation, intra-abdominal sepsis, surgical site infections, and prolonged hospital stay. Early surgical exploration and abdominal decompression must be considered in such cases.

Doxorubicin as Risk Factor for Fascial Dehiscence After CRS-HIPEC for Peritoneal Metastases.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Among postoperative complications, fascial dehiscence (FD) is registered in up to 10% of patients after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors related to FD after CRS-HIPEC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC between 2015 and 2023 was performed. For each patient, risk factors for postoperative fascial dehiscence were identified using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: During the study period (2018-2023), 217 patients were treated with CRS-HIPEC. The incidence of FD was observed in seven cases (3.2%), which were reoperated with direct fascial closure. In three cases, FD was associated with other grade III-IV complications. Body mass index, (BMI; p=0.024), doxorubicin-based HIPEC (p=0.005), and open technique (p=0.004) were identified as risk factors for FD in univariate analysis. Systemic chemotherapy, prior surgical score, and peritoneal cancer index (PCI) were not associated with an increased risk of FD. In multivariable regression analysis, doxorubicin-based HIPEC and open technique were confirmed as risk factors for FD. CONCLUSION: Although FD is a relatively rare event after CRS-HIPEC, open technique and doxorubicin-based HIPEC were significant predictors of this complication. Specific fascial closure techniques and proper wound care should be considered in high-risk patients.

Prophylactic mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy closure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy closure is controversial. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the placement of prophylactic mesh during emergency laparotomy. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Cochrane, Scopus, and PubMed databases to identify RCT comparing prophylactic mesh augmentation and no mesh augmentation in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. We excluded observational studies, conference abstracts, elective surgeries, overlapping populations, and trial protocols. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). The review protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023412934). RESULTS: We screened 1312 studies and 33 were thoroughly reviewed. Four studies comprising 464 patients were included in the analysis. Mesh reinforcement was significantly associated with a decrease in incisional hernia incidence (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.07-0.44; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), and synthetic mesh placement reduced fascial dehiscence (OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01-0.53; p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). Mesh augmentation was associated with an increase in operative time (MD 32.09 min; 95% CI 6.39-57.78; p = 0.01; I2 = 49%) and seroma (OR 3.89; 95% CI 1.54-9.84; p = 0.004; I2 = 0%), but there was no difference in surgical-site infection or surgical-site occurrences requiring procedural intervention or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Mesh augmentation in emergency laparotomy decreases incisional hernia and fascial dehiscence incidence. Despite the risk of seroma, prophylactic mesh augmentation appears to be safe and might be considered for emergency laparotomy closure. Further studies evaluating long-term outcomes are still needed.

Transverse Incision for Pancreatoduodenectomy Reduces Wound Complications: A Single-Center Analysis of 399 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Even if the minimally invasive approach is advancing in pancreatic surgery, the open approach is still the standard for a pancreatoduodenectomy. There are two types of incisions used: the midline incision (MI) and transverse incision (TI). The aim of this study was to compare these two incision types, especially regarding wound complications. METHODS: A retrospective review of 399 patients who underwent a pancreatoduodenectomy at the University Hospital Erlangen between 2012 and 2021 was performed. A total of 169 patients with MIs were compared with 230 patients with TIs, with a focus on postoperative fascial dehiscence, postoperative superficial surgical site infection (SSSI) and the occurrence of incisional hernias during follow-up. RESULTS: Postoperative fascial dehiscence, postoperative SSSI and incisional hernias occurred in 3%, 8% and 5% of patients, respectively. Postoperative SSSI and incisional hernias were significantly less frequent in the TI group (SSI: 5% vs. 12%, p = 0.024; incisional hernia: 2% vs. 8%, p = 0.041). A multivariate analysis confirmed the TI type as an independent protective factor for the occurrence of SSSI and incisional hernias (HR 0.45 (95% CI = 0.20-0.99), p = 0.046 and HR 0.18 (95% CI = 0.04-0.92), p = 0.039, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the transverse incision for pancreatoduodenectomy is associated with reduced wound complications. This finding should be confirmed by a randomized controlled trial.

Fascial dehiscence: predictable complication? Development and validation of a risk model: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Fascial dehiscence is still an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the postoperative period of abdominal surgery. Different authors have sought to identify risk factors for this entity. Two risk scores have been developed, but they include postoperative variables, which hinder preventive decision-making during the early surgical period. Our aim is to identify preoperative and intraoperative risk factors for fascial dehiscence and to develop and validate a risk prediction score that allows taking preventive behaviors. METHODS: All adult patients, with no prior history of abdominal surgery, who underwent midline laparotomy by a general surgery division between January 2009 and December 2019 were included. Recognized preoperative risk factors for fascial dehiscence were evaluated in a univariate analysis and subsequently entered in a multivariate stepwise logistic regression model. A prognostic risk model was developed and posteriorly validated by bootstrapping. This study was conducted following the STROBE statement. RESULTS: A total of 594 patients were included. Fascial dehiscence was detected in 41 patients (6.9%). On multivariate analysis, eight factors were identified: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), immunosuppression, smoking, prostatic hyperplasia, anticoagulation use, sepsis, and overweight. The resulting score ranges from 1 to 8. Scores above 3 are predictive of 18% risk of dehiscence with a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 80% (ROC 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: We present a new preoperative prognostic score to identify patients with a high risk of fascial dehiscence. It can be a guide for decision-making that allows taking intraoperative preventive measures. External validation is still required.

Abdominal fascia dehiscence: is there a connection to a special microbial spectrum?

INTRODUCTION: Acute fascia dehiscence (FD) is a threatening complication occurring in 0.4-3.5% of cases after abdominal surgery. Prolonged hospital stay, increased mortality and increased rate of incisional hernias could be following consequences. Several risk factors are controversially discussed. Even though surgical infection is a known, indisputable risk factor, it is still not proven if a special spectrum of pathogens is responsible. In this study, we investigated if a specific spectrum of microbial pathogens is associated with FD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched pair analysis of 53 consecutive patients with an FD after abdominal surgery in 2010-2016. Matching criteria were gender, age, primary procedure and surgeon. The primary endpoint was the frequency of pathogens detected intraoperatively, the secondary endpoint was the occurrence of risk factors in patients with (FD) and without (nFD) FD. RESULTS: Intraabdominal pathogens were detected more often in the FD group (p = 0.039), with a higher number of Gram-positive pathogens. Enterococci were the most common pathogen (p = 0.002), not covered in 73% (FD group) compared to 22% (nFD group) by the given antibiotic therapy. Multivariable analysis showed detection of Gram-positive pathogens, detection of enterococci in primary laparotomy beside chronic lung disease, surgical site infections and continuous steroid therapy as independent risk factors. CONCLUSION: Risk factors are factors that reduce wound healing or increase intra-abdominal pressure. Furthermore detection of Gram-positive pathogens especially enterococci was detected as an independent risk factor and its empirical coverage could be advantageous for high-risk patients.

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Clinical Equivalence of PD Synth and PDS Polydioxanone Sutures.

Introduction Incisional hernia is a common complication of midline laparotomy that may develop even after several years of surgery. Abdominal fascia closure with ideal suture material reduces the incidence of incisional hernia. This study compared the clinical equivalence of PD Synth (Healthium Medtech Limited) and PDS (Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson) slowly absorbed polydioxanone suture with respect to the occurrence of incisional hernia, following elective/emergency midline laparotomy. Methods Eighty-eight subjects undergoing elective/emergency midline laparotomy were randomized to PD Synth (n=45) and PDS (n=43) groups of this prospective, multicenter, randomized (1:1), single-blind, two-arm, parallel-group study (December 2020-May 2023). Primary endpoint was incidence of incisional hernia, occurring within six and 12 months of surgery. Secondary endpoints included incidence of fascial dehiscence, surgical site infection (SSI), suture sinus, seroma, hematoma, scar tenderness, and re-suturing, and evaluation of operative data, hospital stay, intra-operative suture handling, pain, time to return to normal day-to-day activities and work, overall patient satisfaction score, and adverse events. Results One subject in both PD Synth and PDS groups (p>0.05) developed incisional hernia at umbilicus 12 months post-laparotomy. In PDS group, one subject each had incidences of SSI on day 2, day 7, and one month, two subjects developed seroma on day seven, and one subject had readmission on one month; two subjects in PD Synth group developed superficial SSI (one month). Findings of other secondary endpoints were comparable between the groups. Conclusion Primary and secondary outcomes manifested that PD Synth and PDS slowly absorbed polydioxanone sutures are clinically equivalent, and can be used for abdominal fascial closure following midline laparotomy.

Abdominal wound dehiscence is dangerous: a nationwide study of 14,169 patients undergoing elective open resection for colonic cancer.

PURPOSE: The potential impact of abdominal wound dehiscence on long-term survival after elective abdominal surgery is largely unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of abdominal wound dehiscence on survival and incisional hernia repair after elective, open colonic cancer resection. METHODS: This was a nationwide cohort study based on merged data from Danish national registries, comprising patients subjected to elective, open resection for colonic cancer between May 1, 2001 and January 1, 2016. Multivariable Cox Regression analysis and propensity score matching was applied to adjust for confounding. The associations of abdominal wound dehiscence with 90-day mortality and subsequent incisional hernia repair were also examined. RESULTS: A total of 14,169 patients were included in the cohort, of which 549 (3.9%) developed abdominal wound dehiscence. The 5-year survival was significantly decreased in patients with abdominal wound dehiscence (42.4%, 95% CI 38.1-46.7 vs. 53.4%, 52.6-54.3, P < 0.001), which was confirmed in the multivariable analysis (HR 1.22, CI 1.06-1.39, P = 0.004). Abdominal wound dehiscence was significantly associated with increased risk of 90-day mortality (OR 1.60, CI 1.12-2.27, P = 0.009) as well as subsequent incisional hernia repair (HR 1.80, CI 1.07-3.01, P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal wound dehiscence was significantly associated with decreased survival. Fascial closure after open colonic cancer resection should be given high priority to improve the long-term survival.

Failure of Abdominal Wall Closure: Prevention and Management.

This article reviews evidence-based techniques for abdominal closure and management strategies when abdominal wall closures fail. In particular, optimal primary fascial closure techniques, the role of prophylactic mesh, considerations for combined hernia repair, closure techniques when the fascia cannot be closed primarily, and management approaches for fascial dehiscence are reviewed.

Machine Learning to Predict Fascial Dehiscence after Exploratory Laparotomy Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Fascial dehiscence following exploratory laparotomy is associated with significant morbidity and increased mortality. Previously published risk prediction models for fascial dehiscence are dated and limit a surgeon's ability to perform reliable risk assessment intraoperatively. We sought to determine if machine learning can predict fascial dehiscence after exploratory laparotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of 93,024 patients undergoing exploratory laparotomy from the 2011-2018 ACS NSQIP data files. Data were divided into training (2011-2016, n = 69,969) and temporal validation (2017-2018, n = 23,055) cohorts. A clinical decision support tool was developed using the model generated via machine learning techniques. RESULTS: 1,332 (1.9%) patients in the training cohort and 390 (1.7%) patients in the temporal validation cohort developed fascial dehiscence. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.69 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.72) in the validation cohort. Model predictions demonstrated excellent probability calibration. Decision curve analysis calculates net clinical benefit within a threshold range of 0.8%-4.5%. Operative time, surgical site and deep space infections, and body mass index were among the most important features for model predictions. Finally, operative time, sodium level, and hematocrit demonstrated non-linear relationships with predicted risk. CONCLUSION: A clinical decision support tool for predicting fascial dehiscence after exploratory laparotomy was created and validated on a contemporary, national patient cohort using machine learning. The tool calculates net clinical benefit and can be used at the point of care. Some identified risk factor relationships were found to be complex and non-linear, highlighting the ability of some machine learning applications to capture nuanced, patient-specific risk profiles.

Interrupted sutures prevent recurrent abdominal fascial dehiscence: a comparative retrospective single center cohort analysis of risk factors of burst abdomen and its recurrence as well as surgical repair techniques.

BACKGROUND: Burst abdomen (BA) is a severe complication after abdominal surgery, which often requires urgent repair. However, evidence on surgical techniques to prevent burst abdomen recurrence (BAR) is scarce. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with BA comparing them to patients with superficial surgical site infections from the years 2015 to 2018. The data was retrieved from the institutional wound register. We analyzed risk factors for BA occurrence as well as its recurrence after BA repair and surgical closure techniques that would best prevent BAR. RESULTS: We included 504 patients in the analysis, 111 of those suffered from BA. We found intestinal resection (OR 172.510; 22.195-1340.796, p < 0.001), liver cirrhosis (OR 4.788; 2.034-11.269, p < 0.001) and emergency surgery (OR 1.658; 1.050-2.617; p = 0.03) as well as postoperative delirium (OR 5.058; 1.349-18.965, p = 0.016) as the main predictor for developing BA. The main reason for BA was superficial surgical site infection (40.7%). 110 patients received operative revision of the abdominal fascial dehiscence and 108 were eligible for BAR analysis with 14 cases of BAR. Again, post-operative delirium was the patient-related predictor for BAR (OR 13.73; 95% CI 1.812-104-023, p = 0.011). The surgical technique of using interrupted sutures opposed to continuous sutures showed a preventive effect on BAR (OR 0.143, 95% CI 0.026-0,784, p = 0.025). The implantation of an absorbable IPOM mesh did not reduce BAR, but it did reduce the necessity of BAR revision significantly. CONCLUSION: The use of interrupted sutures together with the implantation of an intraabdominal mesh in burst abdomen repair helps to reduce BAR and the need for additional revision surgeries.

EHS clinical guidelines on the management of the abdominal wall in the context of the open or burst abdomen.

PURPOSE: To provide guidelines for all surgical specialists who deal with the open abdomen (OA) or the burst abdomen (BA) in adult patients both on the methods used to close the musculofascial layers of the abdominal wall, and regarding possible materials to be used. METHODS: The guidelines were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach including publications up to January 2017. When RCTs were available, outcomes of interest were quantitatively synthesized by means of a conventional meta-analysis. When only observational studies were available, a meta-analysis of proportions was done. The guidelines were written using the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: For many of the Key Questions that were researched, there were no high quality studies available. While some strong recommendations could be made according to GRADE, the guidelines also contain good practice statements and clinical expertise guidance which are distinct from recommendations that have been formally categorized using GRADE. RECOMMENDATIONS: When considering the OA, dynamic closure techniques should be prioritized over the use of static closure techniques (strong recommendation). However, for techniques including suture closure, mesh reinforcement, component separation techniques and skin grafting, only clinical expertise guidance was provided. Considering the BA, a clinical expertise guidance statement was advised for dynamic closure techniques. Additionally, a clinical expertise guidance statement concerning suture closure and a good practice statement concerning mesh reinforcement during fascial closure were proposed. The role of advanced techniques such as component separation or relaxing incisions is questioned. In addition, the role of the abdominal girdle seems limited to very selected patients.

Prophylactic, Synthetic Intraperitoneal Mesh Versus No Mesh Implantation in Patients with Fascial Dehiscence.

BACKGROUND: Primary closure of post-operative facial dehiscence (FD) is associated with a high incidence of recurrence, revisional surgery, and incisional hernia. This retrospective study compares outcomes of implantation of non-absorbable intra-abdominal meshes with primary closure of FD. The outcomes of different mesh materials were assessed in subgroup analysis. METHODS: A total of 119 consecutive patients with FD were operated (70 mesh group and 49 no mesh group) between 2001 and 2015. Primary outcome parameter was hernia-free survival. Secondary outcome parameters include re-operations of the abdominal wall, intestinal fistula, surgical site infections (SSI), and mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis for hernia-free survival, adjusted Poisson regression analysis for re-operations and adjusted regression analysis for chronic SSI was performed. RESULTS: Hernia-free survival was significantly higher in the mesh group compared to the no mesh group (P = 0.005). Fewer re-operations were necessary in the mesh group compared to the no mesh group (adjusted incidence risk ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.93, P = 0.032). No difference in SSI, intestinal fistula, and mortality was observed between groups. Chronic SSI was observed in 7 (10%) patients in the mesh group (n = 3 [6.7%] with polypropylene mesh and 4 [28.6%] with polyester mesh). The risk for chronic SSI was significantly higher if a polyester mesh was used when compared to a polypropylene mesh (adjusted odds ratio 8.69, 95% CI 1.30-58.05, P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Implantation of a polypropylene but not polyester-based mesh in patients with FD decreases incisional hernia with a low rate of mesh-related morbidity.

Type of incision does not predict abdominal wall outcome after emergency surgery for colonic anastomotic leakage.

PURPOSE: Most literature on abdominal incision is based on patients undergoing elective surgery. In a cohort of patients with anastomotic leakage after colonic cancer resection, we analyzed the association between type of incision, fascial dehiscence, and incisional hernia. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database and merged with information from the Danish National Patient Register. All patients with anastomotic leakage after colonic resection in Denmark from 2001 until 2008 were included and surgical records on re-operations were retrieved. The primary outcome of the study was incisional hernia formation, and the secondary outcome was fascial dehiscence. Multivariable logistic, Cox, and competing risks regression analysis, as well as propensity score matching were used for confounder control. RESULTS: A total of 363 patients undergoing reoperation for anastomotic leakage were included with a median follow-up of 5.4 years. Incisional hernia occurred in 41 of 227 (15.3%) patients undergoing midline incision compared with 14 of 81 (14.7%) following transverse incision, P = 1.00. After adjusting for confounders, there was no association between the type of incision and incisional hernia (transverse incision hazard ratio 1.36, 0.68-2.72, P = 0.390) or fascial dehiscence (transverse incision odds ratio 1.66, 0.57-4.49, P = 0.331). This conclusion was confirmed after propensity score matching, P = 0.507. CONCLUSIONS: In the current study, type of incision did not predict abdominal wall outcome after emergency surgery for colonic anastomotic leakage.

Synthetic meshes in the treatment of postoperative fascial dehiscence of the spine.

BACKGROUND: A fascial dehiscence after spinal instrumentation is usually located at the mechanically stressed interscapular thoracic spine and often causes cosmetic impairment and pain. However, therapy options remain barely discussed. Synthetic meshes have been successfully used in the treatment of abdominal hernias. OBJECTIVE: It was hypothesized that synthetic meshes are a successful treatment option for spinal fascial dehiscence. METHODS: This retrospective study of a prospective database investigated all consecutive patients who received a synthetic mesh for a fascial dehiscence of the spine between 2010 and 2014 after prior spinal instrumentation. Primary outcomes were healing of the fascial dehiscence, recurrence, infection, revision, subjective satisfaction on a visual analog scale (VAS), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Among others, secondary outcomes consisted of seroma formation and return to work. The evaluated risk factors consisted of the body mass index (BMI), outer abdominal fat (OAF), back tissue, smoking, immunomodulatory therapy, preoperative radiation dose, and instrumented levels. RESULTS: Sixteen patients with a mean follow up of 24 months were included. Every fascial dehiscence successfully healed with the synthetic mesh and there were no recurrences, infections or revisions. The mean subjective satisfaction level was VAS 7.3 and the mean ODI was 26%. Five (31%) patients had a seroma postoperatively, but did not show any differences in the outcome (e.g. ODI of 28%). In the patient group < 65 years (n = 12), all but two patients, who had work restrictions due to other diseases, regained at least some capacity to work. Worse ODI scores were found for patients with increased BMI, OAF, back tissue, cortisone therapy, instrumented levels, preoperative radiation dose, and for smokers. CONCLUSION: Synthetic meshes are a successful treatment option for spinal fascial dehiscence, even seemingly in patients with a higher risk profile such as obese and immunocompromised patients as well as in revision procedures. They are associated with respectable cosmetic results, pain relief and clinical outcome. Postoperatively, it is recommended to leave drains for more than five to seven days in order to avoid seroma formation and to avoid weight training for six weeks. Further prospective, comparative studies are recommended.