Photographic assessment of postsurgical facial scars epidermally sutured with rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 or nylon: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons use absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures for epidermal wound closure. No large, randomized studies have compared the effect of these suture types on facial scar appearance. OBJECTIVE: To assess postsurgical facial scar appearance using either rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 or nylon for epidermal closure. METHODS: Randomized, blinded, split-scar clinical trial. A total of 105 patients with facial wounds resulting from Mohs micrographic surgery excisions were randomly assigned for epidermal closure with rapidly absorbable 5-0 polyglactin 910 (Vicryl Rapide) on one half of the repair and 5-0 nylon (Ethilon) on the other half. Two physicians (1 dermatologist and 1 plastic surgeon), unaware of the original suture location, examined photographs of each healed wound at 6 months after surgery and graded the appearance of each half of the scar using the visual analog scale, wound evaluation scale, and Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale. RESULTS: At 6 months, there was no significant difference in the combined mean (standard deviation) visual analog scale scores (83.1 [14.2] and 83.0 [13.7]), Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale scores (4.3 [0.9] and 4.4 [0.9]), or wound evaluation scale scores (5.3 [1.1] and 5.2 [1.1]) for rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 versus nylon (P = .72, .57, and .21, respectively). LIMITATIONS: Single institution. CONCLUSIONS: Both rapidly absorbable polyglactin 910 and nylon sutures placed through the epidermis resulted in an equivalent photographic appearance of facial scars at 6 months after surgery.

Evaluation of in vivo properties of Velosorb™ fast versus Vicryl™ rapide in a functional rabbit model of intradermic suture and episiotomy.

OBJECTIVE: Fast-absorbing polyglactin 910 is commonly used to suture skin and vaginal incisions. In vitro studies have shown similar tensile strength properties between Velosorb™ Fast and Vicryl™ Rapide (Al-Qattan MM. J Hand Surg Br Eur. 2005;30(1):90-91). This randomized study compared Velosorb™ Fast (Covidien) with Vicryl™ Rapide (Ethicon) in a rabbit model of intradermic suture and episiotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized prospective study was performed on 20 New Zealand rabbits, in which we realized a mediolateral perineo-vaginal incision and two vertical skin incisions of about 8 cm on the abdominal wall. The sutures were randomized between Velosorb™ Fast (Covidien) and Vicryl™ Rapide (Ethicon), and each rabbit was treated with the same suture on both vaginal incision and left abdominal incision, while the right abdominal incision was closed with an alternate suture. A macroscopic examination was performed on days 5 and 11. On day 11, animals were sacrificed for histological (Badylak quantitative score) and electron microscopic examinations. Differences were considered significant at p < .05. RESULTS: All of the rabbits survived and were included in the final results. Fifty-one sutures were visible by histologic analysis (27 in the Velosorb™ Fast group and 24 in the Vicryl™ Rapide group). The power of the study was ≥80%. There was no significant difference between the two groups based on the total histologic Badylak score analysis or the Badylak sub-score analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Velosorb™ Fast seems to be as efficient as Vicryl™ Rapide for use in perineal and skin closure.