Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Absorbable and Nonabsorbable Sutures in A1 Pulley Release.

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
HAND Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-24 DOI:10.1177/15589447231210332
Young Bae Kim, Yun Seong Choi, Tae Hyuck Yoon, Hee Dong Lee
{"title":"Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Absorbable and Nonabsorbable Sutures in A1 Pulley Release.","authors":"Young Bae Kim, Yun Seong Choi, Tae Hyuck Yoon, Hee Dong Lee","doi":"10.1177/15589447231210332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Both absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures are used to correct palmar incisions or lacerations. Nonabsorbable sutures have been used without complications but require removal at a follow-up appointment. Alternatively, the use of absorbable sutures has increased in popularity as postoperative suture removal is not required but is associated with local immunological and inflammatory responses. In this study, we compared the scar quality and outcomes of nonabsorbable and absorbable sutures in A1 pulley release.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent A1 pulley release were randomized to 1 of 2 suture materials. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale, Observer Scar Assessment Scale, Visual Analogue Scale, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were collected at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively. Among the 41 patients included in the study, 23 were randomized to the nonabsorbable suture group, and 18 to the absorbable suture group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences between the two suture groups in the aforementioned assessments. Complication rates were higher in the nonabsorbable suture group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Notably, 1 case in the absorbable suture group had uncontrolled postoperative bleeding and required reoperation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We found no significant difference between the two materials in terms of the Patient or Observer Scar Assessment Scales, overall complication rates, symptom scores, or pain scores. Therefore, the choice using absorbable or nonabsorbable can be guided by other factors such as physician or patient preference, availability, and cost.</p>","PeriodicalId":12902,"journal":{"name":"HAND","volume":" ","pages":"203-207"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11833909/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HAND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447231210332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Both absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures are used to correct palmar incisions or lacerations. Nonabsorbable sutures have been used without complications but require removal at a follow-up appointment. Alternatively, the use of absorbable sutures has increased in popularity as postoperative suture removal is not required but is associated with local immunological and inflammatory responses. In this study, we compared the scar quality and outcomes of nonabsorbable and absorbable sutures in A1 pulley release.

Methods: Patients who underwent A1 pulley release were randomized to 1 of 2 suture materials. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale, Observer Scar Assessment Scale, Visual Analogue Scale, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were collected at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively. Among the 41 patients included in the study, 23 were randomized to the nonabsorbable suture group, and 18 to the absorbable suture group.

Results: There were no significant differences between the two suture groups in the aforementioned assessments. Complication rates were higher in the nonabsorbable suture group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Notably, 1 case in the absorbable suture group had uncontrolled postoperative bleeding and required reoperation.

Conclusion: We found no significant difference between the two materials in terms of the Patient or Observer Scar Assessment Scales, overall complication rates, symptom scores, or pain scores. Therefore, the choice using absorbable or nonabsorbable can be guided by other factors such as physician or patient preference, availability, and cost.

比较A1滑轮松解术中可吸收缝线和不可吸收缝线的前瞻性随机对照试验。
背景:可吸收缝合线和不可吸收缝合线都被用来矫正手掌的切口或撕裂。不可吸收缝合线已使用,无并发症,但需要在随访预约时拆除。另外,可吸收缝合线的使用越来越受欢迎,因为术后不需要拆除缝合线,但与局部免疫和炎症反应有关。在这项研究中,我们比较了A1滑轮释放中不可吸收缝线和可吸收缝线的疤痕质量和结果。方法:采用A1滑轮松解术的患者随机选择2种缝合材料中的1种。在术后2周、6周和12周收集患者疤痕评估量表、观察者疤痕评估量表、视觉模拟量表和手臂、肩部和手部残疾评分。纳入研究的41例患者中,23例随机分为不可吸收缝线组,18例随机分为可吸收缝线组。结果:两缝合组在上述评估中无显著差异。不可吸收缝线组并发症发生率较高,但差异无统计学意义。值得注意的是,可吸收缝线组1例术后出血不受控制,需再次手术。结论:我们发现两种材料在患者或观察者疤痕评估量表、总并发症发生率、症状评分或疼痛评分方面无显著差异。因此,使用可吸收性或不可吸收性的选择可以由其他因素指导,如医生或患者的偏好、可用性和成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
HAND
HAND Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
209
期刊介绍: HAND is the official journal of the American Association for Hand Surgery and is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians worldwide presenting current research and clinical work in the field of hand surgery. It features articles related to all aspects of hand and upper extremity surgery and the post operative care and rehabilitation of the hand.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信