Cargando…

Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures

BACKGROUND: Skin closure techniques during minimally-invasive gynecologic surgery is largely based on surgeon preference. The optimum technique would theoretically be safe, rapid, inexpensive, and result in good cosmetic appearance. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Dermabond) may be a comparable and s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fluellen, Sunetris, Mackey, Kyle, Hagglund, Karen, Aslam, Muhammad Faisal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7603786/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33194565
http://dx.doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v10.i1.1
_version_ 1783604000892911616
author Fluellen, Sunetris
Mackey, Kyle
Hagglund, Karen
Aslam, Muhammad Faisal
author_facet Fluellen, Sunetris
Mackey, Kyle
Hagglund, Karen
Aslam, Muhammad Faisal
author_sort Fluellen, Sunetris
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Skin closure techniques during minimally-invasive gynecologic surgery is largely based on surgeon preference. The optimum technique would theoretically be safe, rapid, inexpensive, and result in good cosmetic appearance. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Dermabond) may be a comparable and safe option for port site closure as compared with subcuticular suture. In this randomized clinical trial, we hypothesized that operative time for skin closure would be less than subcuticular suture during robotic urogynecologic procedures. AIM: To compare skin closure during robotic urogynecologic surgeries for tissue adhesives and subcuticular suture. METHODS: Fifty female subjects > 18 years of age undergoing robotic urogynecologic procedures were randomized to have port site closure with either cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (n = 25) or subcuticular suture (n = 25). All procedures and postoperative evaluations were performed by the same board certified Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgeon. Incisional closure time was recorded. Each subject was followed for 12-wk postoperatively. Incision cosmesis was evaluated using the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale. RESULTS: A total of 47 subjects (cyanoacrylate group, n = 23; suture group, n = 24) completed the 12-wk postoperative evaluation. Closure time was significantly less (P < 0.0005) using cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (5.4 ± 2.0 min) than subcuticular suture (24.9 ± 5.6 min). Cosmesis scores were significantly higher in the cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive group than subcuticular suture (P = 0.025). No differences were found between bleeding, infection, or dehiscence (P = 1.00, P = 0.609, P = 0.234, respectively). No statistical demographical differences existed between the two study arms. CONCLUSION: Our study supported our original hypothesis that cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive for port site closure during robotic urogynecolgic procedures uses less time than with subcuticular suture. Our study also supports that tissue adhesive is comparable to cosmetic outcome while not jeopardizing rates of bleeding, infection, or dehiscence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7603786
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76037862020-11-12 Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures Fluellen, Sunetris Mackey, Kyle Hagglund, Karen Aslam, Muhammad Faisal World J Methodol Clinical Trials Study BACKGROUND: Skin closure techniques during minimally-invasive gynecologic surgery is largely based on surgeon preference. The optimum technique would theoretically be safe, rapid, inexpensive, and result in good cosmetic appearance. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Dermabond) may be a comparable and safe option for port site closure as compared with subcuticular suture. In this randomized clinical trial, we hypothesized that operative time for skin closure would be less than subcuticular suture during robotic urogynecologic procedures. AIM: To compare skin closure during robotic urogynecologic surgeries for tissue adhesives and subcuticular suture. METHODS: Fifty female subjects > 18 years of age undergoing robotic urogynecologic procedures were randomized to have port site closure with either cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (n = 25) or subcuticular suture (n = 25). All procedures and postoperative evaluations were performed by the same board certified Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgeon. Incisional closure time was recorded. Each subject was followed for 12-wk postoperatively. Incision cosmesis was evaluated using the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale. RESULTS: A total of 47 subjects (cyanoacrylate group, n = 23; suture group, n = 24) completed the 12-wk postoperative evaluation. Closure time was significantly less (P < 0.0005) using cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (5.4 ± 2.0 min) than subcuticular suture (24.9 ± 5.6 min). Cosmesis scores were significantly higher in the cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive group than subcuticular suture (P = 0.025). No differences were found between bleeding, infection, or dehiscence (P = 1.00, P = 0.609, P = 0.234, respectively). No statistical demographical differences existed between the two study arms. CONCLUSION: Our study supported our original hypothesis that cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive for port site closure during robotic urogynecolgic procedures uses less time than with subcuticular suture. Our study also supports that tissue adhesive is comparable to cosmetic outcome while not jeopardizing rates of bleeding, infection, or dehiscence. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2020-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7603786/ /pubmed/33194565 http://dx.doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v10.i1.1 Text en ©The Author(s) 2020. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Clinical Trials Study
Fluellen, Sunetris
Mackey, Kyle
Hagglund, Karen
Aslam, Muhammad Faisal
Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
title Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
title_full Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
title_fullStr Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
title_full_unstemmed Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
title_short Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
title_sort randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
topic Clinical Trials Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7603786/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33194565
http://dx.doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v10.i1.1
work_keys_str_mv AT fluellensunetris randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingskinclosurewithtissueadhesivesvssubcuticularsutureafterroboticurogynecologicprocedures
AT mackeykyle randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingskinclosurewithtissueadhesivesvssubcuticularsutureafterroboticurogynecologicprocedures
AT hagglundkaren randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingskinclosurewithtissueadhesivesvssubcuticularsutureafterroboticurogynecologicprocedures
AT aslammuhammadfaisal randomizedclinicaltrialcomparingskinclosurewithtissueadhesivesvssubcuticularsutureafterroboticurogynecologicprocedures