Literature DB >> 15368623

Skin closure in carpal tunnel surgery: a prospective comparative study between nylon, polyglactin 910 and stainless steel sutures.

Tomas Menovsky1, Ronald H M A Bartels, Erik L van Lindert, J André Grotenhuis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cosmetic outcome, pain and tenderness around the operation scar of carpal tunnel syndrome surgery using either nylon, polyglactin 910 or stainless steel sutures for skin closure.
METHODS: A randomised clinical trial comparing nylon, polyglactin 910 or stainless steel sutures for skin closure in 61 patients undergoing carpal tunnel syndrome surgery was performed. Pain, tenderness, scar hypertrophy, redness and the presence of granulomas were assessed in all patients at ten days and six weeks after surgery and compared by non-parametric statistical tests.
RESULTS: Adequate surgical decompression of the median nerve could be achieved in all patients. All but two patients experienced significant relief of tingling of the fingers. Nearly all patients reported some degree of discomfort around the scar. At ten days, the mean pain score was 1.7 (+/-2.2), 3.1 (+/-2.3) and 1.9 (+/-2.3) for the nylon, vicryl and steel groups, respectively. At six weeks, the pain score was 3.6 (+/-3.1), 3.4 (+/-2.6) and 2.7 (+/-2.1) for the nylon, vicryl and steel groups, respectively. The infection rate was 0%, 8% and 0% for the nylon, vicryl and steel groups, respectively. Suture granulomas were significantly more present in the vicryl group (p<0.05). There were no statistical differences in redness or hypertrophy of the wound between the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Nylon and stainless steel sutures are both suitable for skin closure after carpal tunnel surgery. Based on this study, absorbable vicryl sutures should not be used, since the incidence of infections and the presence of suture granulomas was much higher than in the nylon and steel suture groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15368623     DOI: 10.1142/s0218810404002017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hand Surg        ISSN: 0218-8104


  7 in total

1.  Current Evidence Regarding Routine Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Hand Surgery.

Authors:  John C Dunn; Austin B Fares; Nicholas Kusnezov; Miguel Pirela-Cruz; Gilberto Gonzalez; Justin D Orr; Mark Pallis
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2017-03-27

2.  Effectiveness of Preoperative Antibiotics in Preventing Surgical Site Infection After Common Soft Tissue Procedures of the Hand.

Authors:  Kevin Li; Tanmaya D Sambare; Sam Y Jiang; Emily J Shearer; Nathan P Douglass; Robin N Kamal
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Subcuticular sutures for skin closure in non-obstetric surgery.

Authors:  Saori Goto; Takashi Sakamoto; Riki Ganeko; Koya Hida; Toshi A Furukawa; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-04-09

4.  Comparing the running subcuticular technique versus the Donati technique in open carpal tunnel release: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sitthiphong Suwannaphisit; Wachirakorn Aonsong; Porames Suwanno; Varah Yuenyongviwat
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 2.359

5.  Comparative study of surgical wound closure with nylon interrupted sutures and running subcuticular vicryl rapide suture after open release of the carpal tunnel.

Authors:  Vasileios Tzimas; Christos Kotsias; Charilaos Galanis; Georgios Panagiotakopoulos; Dimitrios Tsiampas; Juanita Parnis; Konstantinos Tilkeridis; Aliki Fiska
Journal:  Scars Burn Heal       Date:  2022-09-29

Review 6.  Absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for skin closure after carpal tunnel decompression surgery.

Authors:  Ryckie G Wade; Justin Cr Wormald; Andrea Figus
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-02-01

7.  Clinical outcome and wound healing following carpal tunnel decompression: a comparison of two common suture materials.

Authors:  Robert J MacFarlane; Thomas D Donnelly; Yousaf Khan; Syam Morapudi; Mohammad Waseem; Jochen Fischer
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 3.411

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.