Effect of adhesive strips and dermal sutures vs dermal sutures only on wound closure

A randomized clinical trial

Trenton Custis, April W. Armstrong, Thomas H. King, Victoria R. Sharon, Daniel B Eisen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Importance: Although applying adhesive strips to a wound closure has been shown to have outcomes equivalent to those with cuticular suturing, it is unknown whether adhesive strips provide additional benefit compared with dermal suturing alone. Objective: To determine whether the addition of adhesive strips to a wound closed with buried interrupted subcuticular sutures improves outcomes following wound closure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, randomized split-wound intervention was conducted between November 14, 2013, and May 16, 2014, in patients who underwent cutaneous surgical procedures at the University of California, Davis, outpatient dermatology clinic. Fifty-seven patients 18 years or older with postoperative defects of at least 3 cm, resulting from either Mohs micrographic surgical procedures or surgical excision, were screened for participation. Nine patients were excluded and 48 were enrolled. Interventions: Half of each wound was randomized to receive buried interrupted subcuticular sutures and overlying adhesive strips and the other half received buried interrupted subcuticular sutures only. Main Outcomes and Measures: At 3 months' follow-up, each patient and 2 blinded observers evaluated the wound using the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Results: The total mean (SD) Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale score for observers for the side that received a combination of adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing (12.3 [4.8]) and the side that received sutures only (12.9 [6.3]) did not differ significantly at 3 months (P = .32). There was no significant difference in the total patient assessment scale score between the combination closure (14.0 [7.6]) and sutures only (14.7 [7.6]) sides at 3 months (P = .39). There was also no significant difference between the 2 closure methods in terms of mean (SD) scar width (both methods: 1.1 [0.8] mm, P = .89) at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: Combination closure with adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing was not significantly associated with improved overall scar assessment compared with buried interrupted subcuticular suturing alone when evaluated by blinded observers or the patients themselves. Our results do not support the use of adhesive strips as a means to improve cosmetic outcomes or reduce scar width.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)862-867
Number of pages6
JournalJAMA Dermatology
Volume151
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2015

Fingerprint

Adhesives
Sutures
Randomized Controlled Trials
Skin
Cicatrix
Wounds and Injuries
Dermatologic Surgical Procedures
Dermatology
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Cosmetics
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology

Cite this

Effect of adhesive strips and dermal sutures vs dermal sutures only on wound closure : A randomized clinical trial. / Custis, Trenton; Armstrong, April W.; King, Thomas H.; Sharon, Victoria R.; Eisen, Daniel B.

In: JAMA Dermatology, Vol. 151, No. 8, 01.08.2015, p. 862-867.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Custis, Trenton ; Armstrong, April W. ; King, Thomas H. ; Sharon, Victoria R. ; Eisen, Daniel B. / Effect of adhesive strips and dermal sutures vs dermal sutures only on wound closure : A randomized clinical trial. In: JAMA Dermatology. 2015 ; Vol. 151, No. 8. pp. 862-867.
@article{99bdde97f2f644c78af3ecf9482c80e4,
title = "Effect of adhesive strips and dermal sutures vs dermal sutures only on wound closure: A randomized clinical trial",
abstract = "Importance: Although applying adhesive strips to a wound closure has been shown to have outcomes equivalent to those with cuticular suturing, it is unknown whether adhesive strips provide additional benefit compared with dermal suturing alone. Objective: To determine whether the addition of adhesive strips to a wound closed with buried interrupted subcuticular sutures improves outcomes following wound closure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, randomized split-wound intervention was conducted between November 14, 2013, and May 16, 2014, in patients who underwent cutaneous surgical procedures at the University of California, Davis, outpatient dermatology clinic. Fifty-seven patients 18 years or older with postoperative defects of at least 3 cm, resulting from either Mohs micrographic surgical procedures or surgical excision, were screened for participation. Nine patients were excluded and 48 were enrolled. Interventions: Half of each wound was randomized to receive buried interrupted subcuticular sutures and overlying adhesive strips and the other half received buried interrupted subcuticular sutures only. Main Outcomes and Measures: At 3 months' follow-up, each patient and 2 blinded observers evaluated the wound using the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Results: The total mean (SD) Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale score for observers for the side that received a combination of adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing (12.3 [4.8]) and the side that received sutures only (12.9 [6.3]) did not differ significantly at 3 months (P = .32). There was no significant difference in the total patient assessment scale score between the combination closure (14.0 [7.6]) and sutures only (14.7 [7.6]) sides at 3 months (P = .39). There was also no significant difference between the 2 closure methods in terms of mean (SD) scar width (both methods: 1.1 [0.8] mm, P = .89) at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: Combination closure with adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing was not significantly associated with improved overall scar assessment compared with buried interrupted subcuticular suturing alone when evaluated by blinded observers or the patients themselves. Our results do not support the use of adhesive strips as a means to improve cosmetic outcomes or reduce scar width.",
author = "Trenton Custis and Armstrong, {April W.} and King, {Thomas H.} and Sharon, {Victoria R.} and Eisen, {Daniel B}",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.0174",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "151",
pages = "862--867",
journal = "JAMA Dermatology",
issn = "2168-6068",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of adhesive strips and dermal sutures vs dermal sutures only on wound closure

T2 - A randomized clinical trial

AU - Custis, Trenton

AU - Armstrong, April W.

AU - King, Thomas H.

AU - Sharon, Victoria R.

AU - Eisen, Daniel B

PY - 2015/8/1

Y1 - 2015/8/1

N2 - Importance: Although applying adhesive strips to a wound closure has been shown to have outcomes equivalent to those with cuticular suturing, it is unknown whether adhesive strips provide additional benefit compared with dermal suturing alone. Objective: To determine whether the addition of adhesive strips to a wound closed with buried interrupted subcuticular sutures improves outcomes following wound closure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, randomized split-wound intervention was conducted between November 14, 2013, and May 16, 2014, in patients who underwent cutaneous surgical procedures at the University of California, Davis, outpatient dermatology clinic. Fifty-seven patients 18 years or older with postoperative defects of at least 3 cm, resulting from either Mohs micrographic surgical procedures or surgical excision, were screened for participation. Nine patients were excluded and 48 were enrolled. Interventions: Half of each wound was randomized to receive buried interrupted subcuticular sutures and overlying adhesive strips and the other half received buried interrupted subcuticular sutures only. Main Outcomes and Measures: At 3 months' follow-up, each patient and 2 blinded observers evaluated the wound using the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Results: The total mean (SD) Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale score for observers for the side that received a combination of adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing (12.3 [4.8]) and the side that received sutures only (12.9 [6.3]) did not differ significantly at 3 months (P = .32). There was no significant difference in the total patient assessment scale score between the combination closure (14.0 [7.6]) and sutures only (14.7 [7.6]) sides at 3 months (P = .39). There was also no significant difference between the 2 closure methods in terms of mean (SD) scar width (both methods: 1.1 [0.8] mm, P = .89) at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: Combination closure with adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing was not significantly associated with improved overall scar assessment compared with buried interrupted subcuticular suturing alone when evaluated by blinded observers or the patients themselves. Our results do not support the use of adhesive strips as a means to improve cosmetic outcomes or reduce scar width.

AB - Importance: Although applying adhesive strips to a wound closure has been shown to have outcomes equivalent to those with cuticular suturing, it is unknown whether adhesive strips provide additional benefit compared with dermal suturing alone. Objective: To determine whether the addition of adhesive strips to a wound closed with buried interrupted subcuticular sutures improves outcomes following wound closure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, randomized split-wound intervention was conducted between November 14, 2013, and May 16, 2014, in patients who underwent cutaneous surgical procedures at the University of California, Davis, outpatient dermatology clinic. Fifty-seven patients 18 years or older with postoperative defects of at least 3 cm, resulting from either Mohs micrographic surgical procedures or surgical excision, were screened for participation. Nine patients were excluded and 48 were enrolled. Interventions: Half of each wound was randomized to receive buried interrupted subcuticular sutures and overlying adhesive strips and the other half received buried interrupted subcuticular sutures only. Main Outcomes and Measures: At 3 months' follow-up, each patient and 2 blinded observers evaluated the wound using the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Results: The total mean (SD) Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale score for observers for the side that received a combination of adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing (12.3 [4.8]) and the side that received sutures only (12.9 [6.3]) did not differ significantly at 3 months (P = .32). There was no significant difference in the total patient assessment scale score between the combination closure (14.0 [7.6]) and sutures only (14.7 [7.6]) sides at 3 months (P = .39). There was also no significant difference between the 2 closure methods in terms of mean (SD) scar width (both methods: 1.1 [0.8] mm, P = .89) at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: Combination closure with adhesive strips and buried interrupted subcuticular suturing was not significantly associated with improved overall scar assessment compared with buried interrupted subcuticular suturing alone when evaluated by blinded observers or the patients themselves. Our results do not support the use of adhesive strips as a means to improve cosmetic outcomes or reduce scar width.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84941638310&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84941638310&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.0174

DO - 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.0174

M3 - Article

VL - 151

SP - 862

EP - 867

JO - JAMA Dermatology

JF - JAMA Dermatology

SN - 2168-6068

IS - 8

ER -