Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A comparison of cosmetic outcomes of lacerations on the extremities and trunk using absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to compare the cosmetic outcomes of traumatic trunk and extremity lacerations repaired using absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures. The secondary objective was to compare complication rates between the two groups.

METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial comparing wounds repaired with Vicryl Rapide and Prolene sutures. Pediatric and adult patients with lacerations were enrolled in the study. At a 10-day follow-up, the wounds were evaluated for infection and dehiscence. After 3 months, patients returned to have the wounds photographed. Two plastic surgeons blinded to the method of closure rated the cosmetic outcome of each wound using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS). Using a noninferiority design, a VAS score of 13 mm or greater was considered to be a clinically significant difference. We used a Student's t-test to compare differences between mean VAS scores and odds ratios (ORs) to compare differences in complication rates between the two groups.

RESULTS: Of the 115 patients enrolled, 73 completed the study including 35 in the Vicryl Rapide group and 38 in the Prolene group. The mean (±SD) age of patients who completed the study was 22.1 (±15.5) years, and 39 were male. We found no significant differences in the age, race, sex, length of wound, number of sutures, or layers of repair in the two groups. The observer's mean VAS for the Vicryl Rapide group was 54.1 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] = 44.5 to 67.0 mm) and for the Prolene group was 54.5 mm (95% CI = 45.7 to 66.3 mm). The resulting mean difference was 0.5 mm (95% CI = -12.1 to 17.2 mm; p = 0.9); thus noninferiority was established. Statistical testing showed no differences in the rates of complications between the two groups, but a higher percentage of the Vicryl Rapide wounds developed complications.

CONCLUSIONS: The use of absorbable sutures for the repair of simple lacerations on the trunk and extremities should be considered as an alternative to nonabsorbable suture repair.

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.

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