5-0 Polypropylene versus 5-0 fast absorbing plain gut for cutaneous wound closure: a randomized evaluator blind trial

Daniel Brian Eisen, Anne Rang Zhuang, Aliza Hasan, Victoria Rose Sharon, Heejung Bang, Milene Kennedy Crispin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Mixed opinions exist regarding cosmetic outcomes of 5-0 fast absorbing plain (FG) gut relative to nonabsorbable suture material, such as 5-0 polypropylene (PP). High quality randomized trials comparing these two suture materials are lacking. To determine whether the use of PP during layered repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds improves scar cosmesis compared to wound closure with FG. A randomized, split wound, comparative effectiveness trial was undertaken. Patients were evaluated 3 months after the intervention by two blinded physicians using the validated patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Patient assessments were also captured using the same instrument as well as scar width and complications. The mean sum of the six components of the POSAS was 10.26 vs 12.74 for PP and FG, respectively, significantly (p < 0.001) in favor of PP. Mean observer overall opinion similarly showed better outcomes for PP than for FG [1.88 vs 2.52, respectively (p < 0.006)]. The mean sum of the patient assessed components of the POSAS for PP and FG was 12.3 vs 14.34, respectively (p = 0.11). Patient overall opinion significantly favored PP (2.41 vs 3.14, p = 0.043). PP resulted in small but statistically significant better cosmetic outcomes than FG. Pain experienced during suture removal was minimal for most patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalArchives of Dermatological Research
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Polypropylenes
Skin
Cicatrix
Wounds and Injuries
Sutures
Cosmetics
Dermatologic Surgical Procedures
Physicians
Pain

Keywords

  • Cosmetic outcome
  • Fast absorbing gut
  • Polypropylene
  • Suture material

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology

Cite this

5-0 Polypropylene versus 5-0 fast absorbing plain gut for cutaneous wound closure : a randomized evaluator blind trial. / Eisen, Daniel Brian; Zhuang, Anne Rang; Hasan, Aliza; Sharon, Victoria Rose; Bang, Heejung; Crispin, Milene Kennedy.

In: Archives of Dermatological Research, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Eisen, Daniel Brian ; Zhuang, Anne Rang ; Hasan, Aliza ; Sharon, Victoria Rose ; Bang, Heejung ; Crispin, Milene Kennedy. / 5-0 Polypropylene versus 5-0 fast absorbing plain gut for cutaneous wound closure : a randomized evaluator blind trial. In: Archives of Dermatological Research. 2019.
@article{9bbe8d403bd94254932bad5ce736bf03,
title = "5-0 Polypropylene versus 5-0 fast absorbing plain gut for cutaneous wound closure: a randomized evaluator blind trial",
abstract = "Mixed opinions exist regarding cosmetic outcomes of 5-0 fast absorbing plain (FG) gut relative to nonabsorbable suture material, such as 5-0 polypropylene (PP). High quality randomized trials comparing these two suture materials are lacking. To determine whether the use of PP during layered repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds improves scar cosmesis compared to wound closure with FG. A randomized, split wound, comparative effectiveness trial was undertaken. Patients were evaluated 3 months after the intervention by two blinded physicians using the validated patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Patient assessments were also captured using the same instrument as well as scar width and complications. The mean sum of the six components of the POSAS was 10.26 vs 12.74 for PP and FG, respectively, significantly (p < 0.001) in favor of PP. Mean observer overall opinion similarly showed better outcomes for PP than for FG [1.88 vs 2.52, respectively (p < 0.006)]. The mean sum of the patient assessed components of the POSAS for PP and FG was 12.3 vs 14.34, respectively (p = 0.11). Patient overall opinion significantly favored PP (2.41 vs 3.14, p = 0.043). PP resulted in small but statistically significant better cosmetic outcomes than FG. Pain experienced during suture removal was minimal for most patients.",
keywords = "Cosmetic outcome, Fast absorbing gut, Polypropylene, Suture material",
author = "Eisen, {Daniel Brian} and Zhuang, {Anne Rang} and Aliza Hasan and Sharon, {Victoria Rose} and Heejung Bang and Crispin, {Milene Kennedy}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00403-019-02009-5",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Archives of Dermatological Research",
issn = "0340-3696",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 5-0 Polypropylene versus 5-0 fast absorbing plain gut for cutaneous wound closure

T2 - a randomized evaluator blind trial

AU - Eisen, Daniel Brian

AU - Zhuang, Anne Rang

AU - Hasan, Aliza

AU - Sharon, Victoria Rose

AU - Bang, Heejung

AU - Crispin, Milene Kennedy

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Mixed opinions exist regarding cosmetic outcomes of 5-0 fast absorbing plain (FG) gut relative to nonabsorbable suture material, such as 5-0 polypropylene (PP). High quality randomized trials comparing these two suture materials are lacking. To determine whether the use of PP during layered repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds improves scar cosmesis compared to wound closure with FG. A randomized, split wound, comparative effectiveness trial was undertaken. Patients were evaluated 3 months after the intervention by two blinded physicians using the validated patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Patient assessments were also captured using the same instrument as well as scar width and complications. The mean sum of the six components of the POSAS was 10.26 vs 12.74 for PP and FG, respectively, significantly (p < 0.001) in favor of PP. Mean observer overall opinion similarly showed better outcomes for PP than for FG [1.88 vs 2.52, respectively (p < 0.006)]. The mean sum of the patient assessed components of the POSAS for PP and FG was 12.3 vs 14.34, respectively (p = 0.11). Patient overall opinion significantly favored PP (2.41 vs 3.14, p = 0.043). PP resulted in small but statistically significant better cosmetic outcomes than FG. Pain experienced during suture removal was minimal for most patients.

AB - Mixed opinions exist regarding cosmetic outcomes of 5-0 fast absorbing plain (FG) gut relative to nonabsorbable suture material, such as 5-0 polypropylene (PP). High quality randomized trials comparing these two suture materials are lacking. To determine whether the use of PP during layered repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds improves scar cosmesis compared to wound closure with FG. A randomized, split wound, comparative effectiveness trial was undertaken. Patients were evaluated 3 months after the intervention by two blinded physicians using the validated patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Patient assessments were also captured using the same instrument as well as scar width and complications. The mean sum of the six components of the POSAS was 10.26 vs 12.74 for PP and FG, respectively, significantly (p < 0.001) in favor of PP. Mean observer overall opinion similarly showed better outcomes for PP than for FG [1.88 vs 2.52, respectively (p < 0.006)]. The mean sum of the patient assessed components of the POSAS for PP and FG was 12.3 vs 14.34, respectively (p = 0.11). Patient overall opinion significantly favored PP (2.41 vs 3.14, p = 0.043). PP resulted in small but statistically significant better cosmetic outcomes than FG. Pain experienced during suture removal was minimal for most patients.

KW - Cosmetic outcome

KW - Fast absorbing gut

KW - Polypropylene

KW - Suture material

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074995355&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074995355&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00403-019-02009-5

DO - 10.1007/s00403-019-02009-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 31724097

AN - SCOPUS:85074995355

JO - Archives of Dermatological Research

JF - Archives of Dermatological Research

SN - 0340-3696

ER -