COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Use of 5-0 Fast Absorbing Gut versus 6-0 Fast Absorbing Gut during cutaneous wound closure on the head and neck: A randomized evaluator-blinded split-wound comparative effectiveness trial.
BACKGROUND: Absorbable suture material (Fast Absorbing Gut [FG], Ethicon, Somerville NJ) is often used for patient convenience; however, the optimal diameter of FG sutures is debatable.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of 6-0 FG during repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds on the head and neck improves scar cosmesis compared with the use of 5-0 FG.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, split-scar intervention in patients undergoing repair of linear cutaneous wounds on the head and neck. The scar was assessed 3 months after surgery via the Physician Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), a validated instrument.
RESULTS: The difference in the sum of the POSAS component scores for 6-0 FG (12.03) compared with that for 5-0 FG (13.11) was not statistically significant (P = .26). Observer overall opinion was similar for both interventions, at 2.49 for 6-0 FG vs 2.64 for 5-0 FG (P = .54). The difference in the number of complications in the 5-0 FG group (15) vs the 6-0 FG group (10) was not statistically significant (P = .40).
LIMITATIONS: Single-center study with wounds limited to the head and neck in white individuals, with a predominance of men.
CONCLUSION: For linear repair of cutaneous wounds, 6-0 FG was not statistically different for cosmetic outcomes, scar width, and complications compared with 5-0 FG.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of 6-0 FG during repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds on the head and neck improves scar cosmesis compared with the use of 5-0 FG.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, split-scar intervention in patients undergoing repair of linear cutaneous wounds on the head and neck. The scar was assessed 3 months after surgery via the Physician Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), a validated instrument.
RESULTS: The difference in the sum of the POSAS component scores for 6-0 FG (12.03) compared with that for 5-0 FG (13.11) was not statistically significant (P = .26). Observer overall opinion was similar for both interventions, at 2.49 for 6-0 FG vs 2.64 for 5-0 FG (P = .54). The difference in the number of complications in the 5-0 FG group (15) vs the 6-0 FG group (10) was not statistically significant (P = .40).
LIMITATIONS: Single-center study with wounds limited to the head and neck in white individuals, with a predominance of men.
CONCLUSION: For linear repair of cutaneous wounds, 6-0 FG was not statistically different for cosmetic outcomes, scar width, and complications compared with 5-0 FG.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Evidence-Based Guideline for the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis.Nature Reviews. Rheumatology 2023 May 10
A Systematic Approach to Understanding Acid-Base Disorders in the Critically Ill.Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2023 April 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app