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

Aunna Pourang, Milene K. Crispin, Ashley K. Clark, April W. Armstrong, Raja K Sivamani, Daniel B Eisen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Cicatrix
Neck
Head
Skin
Wounds and Injuries
Sutures
Dermatologic Surgical Procedures
Physicians
Cosmetics

Keywords

  • 5-0
  • 6-0
  • cutaneous closure technique
  • cutaneous surgery
  • Fast Absorbing Gut
  • scar evaluation
  • suture caliber
  • suture diameter
  • suture size

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology

Cite this

@article{aa2bd0eea3cc41ff8bdb6817ddce902a,
title = "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",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "5-0, 6-0, cutaneous closure technique, cutaneous surgery, Fast Absorbing Gut, scar evaluation, suture caliber, suture diameter, suture size",
author = "Aunna Pourang and Crispin, {Milene K.} and Clark, {Ashley K.} and Armstrong, {April W.} and Sivamani, {Raja K} and Eisen, {Daniel B}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.037",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology",
issn = "0190-9622",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of 5-0 Fast Absorbing Gut versus 6-0 Fast Absorbing Gut during cutaneous wound closure on the head and neck

T2 - A randomized evaluator-blinded split-wound comparative effectiveness trial

AU - Pourang, Aunna

AU - Crispin, Milene K.

AU - Clark, Ashley K.

AU - Armstrong, April W.

AU - Sivamani, Raja K

AU - Eisen, Daniel B

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - 5-0

KW - 6-0

KW - cutaneous closure technique

KW - cutaneous surgery

KW - Fast Absorbing Gut

KW - scar evaluation

KW - suture caliber

KW - suture diameter

KW - suture size

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065794553&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065794553&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.037

DO - 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.037

M3 - Article

C2 - 30797848

AN - SCOPUS:85065794553

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

SN - 0190-9622

ER -