BACKGROUND:Barbed sutures were developed to reduce operative time and improve security of wound closure. OBJECTIVE: The authors compare absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) with conventional (smooth) absorbable sutures for soft tissue approximation. METHOD: A prospective multicenter randomized study comparing barbed sutures with smooth sutures was undertaken between August 13, 2009, and January 31, 2010, in 241 patients undergoing abdominoplasty, mastopexy, and reduction mammaplasty. Each patient received barbed sutures on 1 side of the body, with deep dermal sutures eliminated or reduced. Smooth sutures with deep dermal and subcuticular closure were used on the other side as a control. The primary endpoint was dermal closure time. Safety was assessed through adverse event reporting through a 12-week follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients were ultimately treated (115 with slow-absorbing polymer and 114 with rapid-absorbing polymer). Mean dermal closure time was significantly quicker with the barbed suture compared with the smooth suture (12.0 vs 19.2 minutes; P<.001), primarily due to the need for fewer deep dermal sutures. The rapid-absorbing barbed suture showed a complication profile equivalent to the smooth suture, while the slow-absorbing barbed suture had a higher incidence of minor suture extrusion. CONCLUSIONS:Barbed sutures enabled faster dermal closure quicker than smooth sutures, with a comparable complication profile. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Barbed sutures were developed to reduce operative time and improve security of wound closure. OBJECTIVE: The authors compare absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) with conventional (smooth) absorbable sutures for soft tissue approximation. METHOD: A prospective multicenter randomized study comparing barbed sutures with smooth sutures was undertaken between August 13, 2009, and January 31, 2010, in 241 patients undergoing abdominoplasty, mastopexy, and reduction mammaplasty. Each patient received barbed sutures on 1 side of the body, with deep dermal sutures eliminated or reduced. Smooth sutures with deep dermal and subcuticular closure were used on the other side as a control. The primary endpoint was dermal closure time. Safety was assessed through adverse event reporting through a 12-week follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients were ultimately treated (115 with slow-absorbing polymer and 114 with rapid-absorbing polymer). Mean dermal closure time was significantly quicker with the barbed suture compared with the smooth suture (12.0 vs 19.2 minutes; P<.001), primarily due to the need for fewer deep dermal sutures. The rapid-absorbing barbed suture showed a complication profile equivalent to the smooth suture, while the slow-absorbing barbed suture had a higher incidence of minor suture extrusion. CONCLUSIONS: Barbed sutures enabled faster dermal closure quicker than smooth sutures, with a comparable complication profile. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.
Authors: Robert W Borzio; Robert Pivec; Bhaveen H Kapadia; Julio J Jauregui; Aditya V Maheshwari Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 3.075