Cargando…

Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery

There is currently no consensus on the optimal suture type for palmar skin closure following open carpal tunnel release and trigger finger release. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients in the Palo Alto Veterans Affairs (PAVA) Health Care System who underwent these procedures over a 2-ye...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rochlin, Danielle H., Sheckter, Clifford C., Curtin, Catherine M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6554153/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31321185
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002189
_version_ 1783424914995281920
author Rochlin, Danielle H.
Sheckter, Clifford C.
Curtin, Catherine M.
author_facet Rochlin, Danielle H.
Sheckter, Clifford C.
Curtin, Catherine M.
author_sort Rochlin, Danielle H.
collection PubMed
description There is currently no consensus on the optimal suture type for palmar skin closure following open carpal tunnel release and trigger finger release. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients in the Palo Alto Veterans Affairs (PAVA) Health Care System who underwent these procedures over a 2-year period to compare 30-day wound outcomes following closure with poliglecaprone 25 (Monocryl), nylon, and chromic gut suture. Out of 312 PAVA cases (133 carpal tunnel release, 179 trigger finger release), incisions closed with Monocryl were significantly less likely to develop dehiscence (Monocryl 2.1%, nylon 10.5%, chromic 10.3%; P = 0.006) and infection (Monocryl 1.6%, nylon 7.4%, chromic 13.8%; P = 0.003), or lead to additional wound-related encounters (Monocryl 8.0%, nylon 16.8%, chromic 24.1%; P = 0.012). On multivariable logistic regression, suture type and diabetes were independent predictors of 30-day wound complications and extra encounters. At PAVA, compared with Monocryl, closures with nylon and chromic were significantly more likely to dehisce and/or become infected [nylon: odds ratio (OR), 5.0; 95% CI, 1.9–13.3 and chromic: OR, 9.3; 95% CI, 2.7–32.4; P = 0.002], and to be associated with an additional encounter (nylon: OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.1–5.3 and chromic: OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.6–12.9; P = 0.007). This has led to using Monocryl as the standard closure for these cases at PAVA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6554153
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65541532019-07-18 Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery Rochlin, Danielle H. Sheckter, Clifford C. Curtin, Catherine M. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Ideas and Innovations There is currently no consensus on the optimal suture type for palmar skin closure following open carpal tunnel release and trigger finger release. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients in the Palo Alto Veterans Affairs (PAVA) Health Care System who underwent these procedures over a 2-year period to compare 30-day wound outcomes following closure with poliglecaprone 25 (Monocryl), nylon, and chromic gut suture. Out of 312 PAVA cases (133 carpal tunnel release, 179 trigger finger release), incisions closed with Monocryl were significantly less likely to develop dehiscence (Monocryl 2.1%, nylon 10.5%, chromic 10.3%; P = 0.006) and infection (Monocryl 1.6%, nylon 7.4%, chromic 13.8%; P = 0.003), or lead to additional wound-related encounters (Monocryl 8.0%, nylon 16.8%, chromic 24.1%; P = 0.012). On multivariable logistic regression, suture type and diabetes were independent predictors of 30-day wound complications and extra encounters. At PAVA, compared with Monocryl, closures with nylon and chromic were significantly more likely to dehisce and/or become infected [nylon: odds ratio (OR), 5.0; 95% CI, 1.9–13.3 and chromic: OR, 9.3; 95% CI, 2.7–32.4; P = 0.002], and to be associated with an additional encounter (nylon: OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.1–5.3 and chromic: OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.6–12.9; P = 0.007). This has led to using Monocryl as the standard closure for these cases at PAVA. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6554153/ /pubmed/31321185 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002189 Text en Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Ideas and Innovations
Rochlin, Danielle H.
Sheckter, Clifford C.
Curtin, Catherine M.
Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery
title Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery
title_full Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery
title_fullStr Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery
title_full_unstemmed Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery
title_short Which Stitch? Replacing Anecdote with Evidence in Minor Hand Surgery
title_sort which stitch? replacing anecdote with evidence in minor hand surgery
topic Ideas and Innovations
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6554153/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31321185
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002189
work_keys_str_mv AT rochlindanielleh whichstitchreplacinganecdotewithevidenceinminorhandsurgery
AT shecktercliffordc whichstitchreplacinganecdotewithevidenceinminorhandsurgery
AT curtincatherinem whichstitchreplacinganecdotewithevidenceinminorhandsurgery