Literature DB >> 25372450

Purse-string suture vs second intention healing: results of a randomized, blind clinical trial.

Jayne Joo1, Trenton Custis1, April W Armstrong2, Thomas H King1, Kenny Omlin3, Stefani T Kappel4, Daniel B Eisen1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Purse-string suture is a closure method that purportedly reduces the scar area compared with second intention healing. Randomized clinical trials comparing these 2 methods appear to be limited or absent.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if purse-string suture improves cosmetic outcome, healing time, and scar to defect area compared with second intention healing for circular defects on the trunk and extremities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective, 2-arm, randomized, evaluator-blinded clinical trial in a single-center outpatient academic dermatology center. Patients were eligible if they were older than 18 years, able to give informed consent, and had circular or oval postoperative defects larger than 8 mm on the trunk or extremities.
INTERVENTIONS: For the purse-string treatment arm, wounds were sewn in circumferential fashion using polydiaxanone suture. Patients in the other treatment arm were allowed to heal by second intent. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were the mean total Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) scores ascertained from the patient and 2 blinded observers. Secondary outcomes included the ratio of scar to initial defect size, healing time, pain scores, and complication rates.
RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were screened, and a total of 44 patients with 50 surgical sites were enrolled. Forty-two patients with 48 surgical sites completed the study. The mean total observer POSAS score was 18.38 for the purse-string group vs 19.91 for the secondary intention group, a nonsignificant difference (P = .41). Similarly, there were no significant differences for any of the following secondary outcome measures: mean total patient POSAS score (P = .96), mean scar-to-defect area (P = .61), and mean pain level at week 1 (P = .19). Statistical trends toward significance were seen in the mean healing time in favor of purse-string suture (P = .10) and scar relief, which favored second intention healing (P = .07). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The purse-string suture results in similar cosmetic outcomes, scar sizes, and pain levels compared with second intention healing for circular or oval wounds on the trunk and extremities. A larger study might better define the potential differences in our secondary outcome measures of healing time and scar relief. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02062866.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25372450     DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.2313

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Dermatol        ISSN: 2168-6068            Impact factor:   10.282


  5 in total

Review 1.  [Dermatosurgery in the elderly].

Authors:  M Meissner; R Kaufmann
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 0.751

2.  Four Quadrant-Embedded Purse-String Closure for Defects of Benign Skin Tumors Post Circular Excision.

Authors:  Alper Ural; Fatma Bilgen; Mehmet Bekerecioglu
Journal:  Eurasian J Med       Date:  2020-06-04

3.  Preliminary Evaluation of the Viability of Peritoneal Drainage Catheters Implanted in Rats for Extended Durations.

Authors:  Nathan Legband; Arielle Black; Craig Kreikemeier-Bower; Benjamin S Terry
Journal:  J Invest Surg       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 2.533

4.  A retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of staged purse-string sutures for the reconstruction of surgical defects on skin using computer image analysis program.

Authors:  Gi Hyun Seong; Kyujin Yeom; Dea Kwan Yun; Mi Soo Choi; Myung Hwa Kim; Byung Cheol Park
Journal:  Indian J Dermatol       Date:  2021 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.494

5.  Undermining during cutaneous wound closure for wounds less than 3 cm in diameter: a randomized split wound comparative effectiveness trial.

Authors:  Jayne Joo; Aunna Pourang; Catherine N Tchanque-Fossuo; April W Armstrong; Danielle M Tartar; Thomas H King; Raja K Sivamani; Daniel B Eisen
Journal:  Arch Dermatol Res       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 3.033

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.