Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of cosmetic outcomes of absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures in pediatric facial lacerations.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare cosmetic outcomes, complication rates, and patient/caregiver satisfaction of absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures in children.

METHODS: Healthy patients, 1 to 18 years old, with facial lacerations 1 to 5 cm, were randomized to repair with fast-absorbing catgut (FAC) or nylon (NYL) sutures. Patients returned in 4 to 7 days and in 3 to 4 months, at which time photographs and caregiver surveys were completed. Unlike part I, all FAC sutures were permitted to absorb rather than be removed. Using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS), a noninferiority (NI) design was applied, with a difference of less than 15 mm considered clinically equivalent. Caregivers and 3 blinded physicians independently rated the scars via photographs.

RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled, 76 caregiver surveys were completed, and 61 (29 FAC, 32 NYL) had photographs scored by physicians. The mean physician VAS scores for FAC and NYL were 57.6 and 67.6, respectively (difference, -10.0; 95% confidence interval, -19.1 to -0.4); thus, NI could not be established. The mean caregiver VAS scores for the FAC and NYL groups were 93.8 and 86.6, respectively (difference, 7.2; 95% confidence interval, -4.9 to 13.9); thus, NI of FAC was established. There were no significant differences in rates of infection, wound dehiscence, or keloid formation. In terms of future preference, caregivers favored FAC (33/33) over NYL (26/36) (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver VAS scores showed NI of FAC, which were also preferred by the caregivers. However, NI for FAC could not be demonstrated by blinded physicians with respect to cosmetic outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app