Use of Cyanoacrylate N-Butyl Versus Subcuticular Suture in the Dermal Closure Following Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Jessica Aidee Mora-Galvan, Norberto Reyes-Paredes, J. M. Grosso-Espinosa, M. Ortiz-Ramirez, M. Godines-Enriquez, C. M. Sepúlveda-Rivera
{"title":"Use of Cyanoacrylate N-Butyl Versus Subcuticular Suture in the Dermal Closure Following Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial","authors":"Jessica Aidee Mora-Galvan, Norberto Reyes-Paredes, J. M. Grosso-Espinosa, M. Ortiz-Ramirez, M. Godines-Enriquez, C. M. Sepúlveda-Rivera","doi":"10.14740/jcgo560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Currently the use of tissue adhesives for surgical wound closure has multiplied; however, its use in cesarean sections is still not well determined. The objective of this study was to compare the surgical wound healing following cesarean sections between N-butyl cyanoacrylate (Tisuacryl) and suture (Monocryl 2-0). Methods: A randomized, non-blinded controlled clinical trial was conducted from October 2017 to March 2018 at the Instituto Nacional de Perinatologia. Forty women undergoing cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to skin closure group using a random number table: 20 with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (Tisuacryl) (cases group) and 20 with Monocryl (control group). Scars were evaluated at 24 h, 1 week, 1 month and 3 months. Primary objective was to evaluate the esthetics of the scar with the scar cosmesis assessment and rating (SCAR) scale. Secondary objectives were skin closing time, the satisfaction of the patient and the satisfaction of the surgeon. Results: Demographic characteristics, including average age, body mass index and number of pregnancies, were similar in both groups. The skin closing time showed a significant decrease with a P value of 0.000 between Tisuacryl and Monocryl (54.95 ± 10.353 s in the first group vs. 407.5 ± 72.61 s). The esthetic evolution of surgery using the SCAR scale showed a better evolution in the first visits (weekly and monthly) in the Monocryl group (2.05 ± 0.60 and 1.68 ± 0.477) vs. Tisuacryl (2.77 ± 0.685 and 2.55 ± 0.74) with a P value of 0.001 in SCAR 1 (first visit) and 0.000 in SCAR 2 (second visit). However, no significant differences were observed in the last result at 3 months (SCAR 3). Similarly, no significant differences were observed regarding the satisfaction of the surgeon or the patient. Conclusions: The results of skin healing with Tisuacryl vs. Monocryl were similar in terms of the esthetics and satisfaction of the patient or the surgeon. Therefore, the use of each one depends on surgeon/patient preferences and the availability of materials. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2019;8(3):85-90 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo560","PeriodicalId":87296,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gynecology and obstetrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gynecology and obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo560","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Currently the use of tissue adhesives for surgical wound closure has multiplied; however, its use in cesarean sections is still not well determined. The objective of this study was to compare the surgical wound healing following cesarean sections between N-butyl cyanoacrylate (Tisuacryl) and suture (Monocryl 2-0). Methods: A randomized, non-blinded controlled clinical trial was conducted from October 2017 to March 2018 at the Instituto Nacional de Perinatologia. Forty women undergoing cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to skin closure group using a random number table: 20 with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (Tisuacryl) (cases group) and 20 with Monocryl (control group). Scars were evaluated at 24 h, 1 week, 1 month and 3 months. Primary objective was to evaluate the esthetics of the scar with the scar cosmesis assessment and rating (SCAR) scale. Secondary objectives were skin closing time, the satisfaction of the patient and the satisfaction of the surgeon. Results: Demographic characteristics, including average age, body mass index and number of pregnancies, were similar in both groups. The skin closing time showed a significant decrease with a P value of 0.000 between Tisuacryl and Monocryl (54.95 ± 10.353 s in the first group vs. 407.5 ± 72.61 s). The esthetic evolution of surgery using the SCAR scale showed a better evolution in the first visits (weekly and monthly) in the Monocryl group (2.05 ± 0.60 and 1.68 ± 0.477) vs. Tisuacryl (2.77 ± 0.685 and 2.55 ± 0.74) with a P value of 0.001 in SCAR 1 (first visit) and 0.000 in SCAR 2 (second visit). However, no significant differences were observed in the last result at 3 months (SCAR 3). Similarly, no significant differences were observed regarding the satisfaction of the surgeon or the patient. Conclusions: The results of skin healing with Tisuacryl vs. Monocryl were similar in terms of the esthetics and satisfaction of the patient or the surgeon. Therefore, the use of each one depends on surgeon/patient preferences and the availability of materials. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2019;8(3):85-90 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo560
使用氰基丙烯酸酯n -丁基与表皮下缝合在剖宫产后真皮闭合:一项随机对照试验
背景:目前,组织粘合剂在外科伤口闭合中的应用成倍增加;然而,它在剖宫产中的应用仍然没有很好的确定。本研究的目的是比较氰基丙烯酸正丁酯(Tisuacryl)和缝线(Monocryl 2-0)在剖宫产术后的伤口愈合情况。方法:2017年10月至2018年3月,在国家围产期研究所进行了一项随机、非盲法对照临床试验。采用随机数表将40例剖宫产妇女随机分为皮肤封闭组:20例采用氰基丙烯酸正丁酯(Tisuacryl)(病例组),20例采用Monocryl(对照组)。在24小时、1周、1个月和3个月时评估瘢痕。主要目的是用疤痕美容评估和评分(scar)量表评估疤痕的美学。次要目标是皮肤闭合时间、患者满意度和外科医生满意度。结果:两组的人口统计学特征,包括平均年龄、体重指数和妊娠次数,相似。Tisuacryl和Monocryl的皮肤闭合时间显著缩短,P值为0.000(第一组为54.95±10.353s,而第二组为407.5±72.61s)。使用SCAR量表的手术美学演变在Monocryl组的第一次就诊(每周和每月)(2.05±0.60和1.68±0.477)优于Tisuacryl(2.77±0.685和2.55±0.74),SCAR 1(第一次就诊)和SCAR 2(第二次就诊)的P值分别为0.001和0.000。然而,在3个月时的最后结果中没有观察到显著差异(SCAR 3)。同样,在外科医生或患者的满意度方面没有观察到显著差异。结论:Tisuacryl与Monocryl的皮肤愈合效果在美学和患者或外科医生的满意度方面相似。因此,每种材料的使用取决于外科医生/患者的偏好和材料的可用性。《临床妇科产科杂志》。2019年;8(3):85-90 doi:https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo560
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信