A Novel Absorbable Stapler Provides Patient-Reported Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness Noninferior to Subcuticular Skin Closure: A Prospective, Single-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Deep dermal suturing is critical for scar quality outcomes. The authors evaluated a new, fast medical device for dermal suturing, with the hypothesis of noninferiority with regard to clinical scar and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS: A prospective, patient-blind, randomized, multicenter noninferiority study in 26 French hospitals was conducted. Patients were randomized 1:1 to suturing with conventional thread or a semiautomatic stapler. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale was rated at 3 months for primary endpoint effectiveness. Secondary endpoints were cost-effectiveness of the two suturing methods, prevalence of complications, suturing/operating time, Observer Scar Assessment Scale and Patient Scar Assessment Scale score, scar aesthetic quality 18 months after surgery, and occupational exposure to blood during surgery.

RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-four patients were enrolled, 660 were randomized, and 649 constituted the full analysis (stapler arm, n = 324; needle arm, n = 325). Primary endpoint Patient Scar Assessment Scale score in the stapler arm was not inferior to that in the needle arm at 3 months or after 18 months. The mean operating time was 180 minutes in the stapler arm and 179 minutes in the needle arm (p = not significant). The mean suturing time was significantly lower in the stapler arm (p < 0.001). There were seven occupational exposures to blood in the needle arm and one in the stapler arm. The two arms did not differ significantly in terms of complications (p = 0.41). The additional cost of using the device was &OV0556;51.57 for the complete-case population.

CONCLUSION: Wound healing outcome was no worse than with conventional suturing using a semiautomatic stapler and associated with less occupational exposure to blood.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, I.