A Comparison of Barbed Sutures and Standard Sutures with regard to Wound Cosmesis in Panniculectomy and Reduction Mammoplasty Patients

Kristen A. Aliano, Michael Trostler, Indira Michelle Fromm, A. Dagum, Sami U. Khan, D. Bui
{"title":"A Comparison of Barbed Sutures and Standard Sutures with regard to Wound Cosmesis in Panniculectomy and Reduction Mammoplasty Patients","authors":"Kristen A. Aliano, Michael Trostler, Indira Michelle Fromm, A. Dagum, Sami U. Khan, D. Bui","doi":"10.1155/2016/7590396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cosmesis is a vital concern for patients undergoing plastic and reconstructive surgery. Many variations in wound closure are employed when attempting to minimize a surgical scar's appearance. Barbed sutures are one potential method of achieving improved wound cosmesis and are more common in recent years. To determine if barbed sutures differ from nonbarbed in wound cosmesis, we conducted a single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial of 18 patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammoplasty or panniculectomy. Patients were their own controls, receiving barbed sutures on one side and standard sutures on the contralateral side. Surgical scars were evaluated postoperatively by patient preference self-assessment and an observer. Ten patients were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively, yielding a mean Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) rating of 4.4 for barbed suture and 3.5 for regular suture (p = 0.15). At 6 months, 8 patients performed self-assessment to determine their preference; 4 preferred the barbed sutures, 1 preferred the regular sutures, and 3 had no preference. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to determine if barbed sutures convey any advantage over standard sutures in wound healing. However, our results suggest that barbed sutures are a reasonable alternative to standard sutures particularly with regard to wound cosmesis.","PeriodicalId":20105,"journal":{"name":"Plastic Surgery International","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic Surgery International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7590396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Cosmesis is a vital concern for patients undergoing plastic and reconstructive surgery. Many variations in wound closure are employed when attempting to minimize a surgical scar's appearance. Barbed sutures are one potential method of achieving improved wound cosmesis and are more common in recent years. To determine if barbed sutures differ from nonbarbed in wound cosmesis, we conducted a single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial of 18 patients undergoing bilateral reduction mammoplasty or panniculectomy. Patients were their own controls, receiving barbed sutures on one side and standard sutures on the contralateral side. Surgical scars were evaluated postoperatively by patient preference self-assessment and an observer. Ten patients were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively, yielding a mean Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) rating of 4.4 for barbed suture and 3.5 for regular suture (p = 0.15). At 6 months, 8 patients performed self-assessment to determine their preference; 4 preferred the barbed sutures, 1 preferred the regular sutures, and 3 had no preference. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to determine if barbed sutures convey any advantage over standard sutures in wound healing. However, our results suggest that barbed sutures are a reasonable alternative to standard sutures particularly with regard to wound cosmesis.
倒钩缝线与标准缝线在乳管切除术及缩乳术患者伤口修补中的比较
对于接受整形和重建手术的患者来说,美容是一个至关重要的问题。当试图减少手术疤痕的外观时,使用了许多不同的伤口闭合方法。倒钩缝合线是一种潜在的方法,实现改善伤口美容,近年来越来越普遍。为了确定有刺缝合线与无刺缝合线在伤口美容中的区别,我们对18例接受双侧缩乳术或乳管切除术的患者进行了单盲、随机、对照试验。患者作为对照,单侧采用倒刺缝合,对侧采用标准缝合。术后疤痕由患者偏好自评和一名观察员评估。10例患者在术后3个月进行评估,倒刺缝合组的平均石溪疤痕评估量表(SBSES)评分为4.4分,常规缝合组为3.5分(p = 0.15)。6个月时,8例患者进行自我评估以确定其偏好;有倒刺缝线4例,规则缝线1例,无针刺缝线3例。需要更大样本量的进一步研究来确定倒钩缝线在伤口愈合方面是否比标准缝线有任何优势。然而,我们的结果表明,倒钩缝合线是一个合理的替代标准缝合线,特别是关于伤口美容。
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