OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of octyl-2-cyanoacrylate tissue glue in lip closure versus Monocryl stitches. DESIGN: Closure of a cleft lip can be done using transcutaneous Monocryl 6 x 0 sutures or using octyl-2-cyanoacrylate tissue glue (Dermabond). In 15 consecutive patients, the cleft lip was closed with Monocryl 6 x 0 and in another 15 consecutive patients, Dermabond was applied. Outcome parameters were complications, satisfaction of the parents with the cosmetic result, and the cosmetic result as judged by professionals. Satisfaction of the parents was assessed using a questionnaire and a visual analog scale. The cosmetic result as judged by professionals was measured by rating standardized pictures according to a visual analog scale. SETTING: A tertiary referral center for children with craniofacial anomalies. RESULTS: Complications were equal in both patient groups (p = .273). Satisfaction of the parents, as well as the professionals, with the cosmetic result did not show significant differences between the Monocryl 6 x 0 and the Dermabond groups (p = .922 and .983, respectively). However, parents were significantly more positive about the cosmetic result than the professionals were (p = .000). CONCLUSION: The results of lip closure using Dermabond tissue glue equal the cosmetic results of lip closure using transcutaneous Monocryl 6 x 0 sutures.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of octyl-2-cyanoacrylate tissue glue in lip closure versus Monocryl stitches. DESIGN: Closure of a cleft lip can be done using transcutaneous Monocryl 6 x 0 sutures or using octyl-2-cyanoacrylate tissue glue (Dermabond). In 15 consecutive patients, the cleft lip was closed with Monocryl 6 x 0 and in another 15 consecutive patients, Dermabond was applied. Outcome parameters were complications, satisfaction of the parents with the cosmetic result, and the cosmetic result as judged by professionals. Satisfaction of the parents was assessed using a questionnaire and a visual analog scale. The cosmetic result as judged by professionals was measured by rating standardized pictures according to a visual analog scale. SETTING: A tertiary referral center for children with craniofacial anomalies. RESULTS: Complications were equal in both patient groups (p = .273). Satisfaction of the parents, as well as the professionals, with the cosmetic result did not show significant differences between the Monocryl 6 x 0 and the Dermabond groups (p = .922 and .983, respectively). However, parents were significantly more positive about the cosmetic result than the professionals were (p = .000). CONCLUSION: The results of lip closure using Dermabond tissue glue equal the cosmetic results of lip closure using transcutaneous Monocryl 6 x 0 sutures.