Photographic assessment of postsurgical facial scars epidermally sutured with rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 or nylon: A randomized clinical trial - 10/10/20
Abstract |
Background |
Surgeons use absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures for epidermal wound closure. No large, randomized studies have compared the effect of these suture types on facial scar appearance.
Objective |
To assess postsurgical facial scar appearance using either rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 or nylon for epidermal closure.
Methods |
Randomized, blinded, split-scar clinical trial. A total of 105 patients with facial wounds resulting from Mohs micrographic surgery excisions were randomly assigned for epidermal closure with rapidly absorbable 5-0 polyglactin 910 (Vicryl Rapide) on one half of the repair and 5-0 nylon (Ethilon) on the other half. Two physicians (1 dermatologist and 1 plastic surgeon), unaware of the original suture location, examined photographs of each healed wound at 6 months after surgery and graded the appearance of each half of the scar using the visual analog scale, wound evaluation scale, and Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale.
Results |
At 6 months, there was no significant difference in the combined mean (standard deviation) visual analog scale scores (83.1 [14.2] and 83.0 [13.7]), Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale scores (4.3 [0.9] and 4.4 [0.9]), or wound evaluation scale scores (5.3 [1.1] and 5.2 [1.1]) for rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 versus nylon (P = .72, .57, and .21, respectively).
Limitations |
Single institution.
Conclusions |
Both rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 and nylon sutures placed through the epidermis resulted in an equivalent photographic appearance of facial scars at 6 months after surgery.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : facial surgery, Mohs micrographic surgery, nonabsorbable suture, randomized controlled trial, rapidly absorbable suture, scar cosmesis, scar outcomes, skin cancer, visual analog scar scale, Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale, wound evaluation scale
Abbreviations used : SBSES, VAS, WES
Plan
Funding sources: None. |
|
Conflicts of interest: None disclosed. |
|
IRB approval status: Reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Board at the University of British Columbia (study number H13-01961). |
|
Reprints not available from the authors. |
Vol 83 - N° 5
P. 1395-1399 - novembre 2020 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?