TY - JOUR
T1 - Skin closure at cesarean delivery, glue vs subcuticular sutures
T2 - a randomized controlled trial
AU - Daykan, Yair
AU - Sharon-Weiner, Maya
AU - Pasternak, Yael
AU - Tzadikevitch-Geffen, Keren
AU - Markovitch, Ofer
AU - Sukenik-Halevy, Rivka
AU - Biron-Shental, Tal
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2017/4/1
Y1 - 2017/4/1
N2 - Background The optimal choice of skin closure at cesarean delivery has not yet been determined. Objective This study compared wound complications and scar healing following cesarean delivery between 2 methods of skin closure: glue (Dermabond; Ethicon, Somerville, NJ) and monofilament (Monocryl; Ethicon) epidermal sutures. Study Design We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which pregnant women undergoing a scheduled cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to skin (epidermis) closure with glue or with a monofilament synthetic suture. The subcutaneous tissue was sutured for all patients. Outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Scars were evaluated >8 weeks. Primary outcome measures were Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores. Secondary outcome measures were surgeon satisfaction, duration of surgery, duration of hospitalization after the cesarean delivery, and complications of surgical site infection or wound disruption (hematoma or seroma). A sample of 104 women was needed to achieve a clinically significant effect with a power of 80%. Results Demographic characteristics, patients’ clinical background, prepregnancy body mass index, and subcutaneous thickness were similar in both groups. Length of surgery between the groups (37 ± 10 minutes for glue vs 39 ± 13 minutes for sutures, P =.515) was similar. Scores immediately after the wound closure were similar for both groups regarding surgeons’ time estimate of closure (P =.181) and closure appearance (P =.082). Surgeons’ satisfaction with the technique was significantly higher in the suture group (P =.003). No significant differences were found between the groups in blood loss, surgical site infection, length of postpartum hospitalization, or wound disruption. Glue and suture skin closure scores using Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale were similar 8 weeks after surgery, at P =.710 for patients and P =.568 for a physician observer. Conclusion Skin closure using glue or a monofilament synthetic suture had similar results. Both methods were shown to be safe and successful for skin closure after a scheduled cesarean delivery and, therefore, can be used based on surgeon and patient preferences.
AB - Background The optimal choice of skin closure at cesarean delivery has not yet been determined. Objective This study compared wound complications and scar healing following cesarean delivery between 2 methods of skin closure: glue (Dermabond; Ethicon, Somerville, NJ) and monofilament (Monocryl; Ethicon) epidermal sutures. Study Design We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which pregnant women undergoing a scheduled cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to skin (epidermis) closure with glue or with a monofilament synthetic suture. The subcutaneous tissue was sutured for all patients. Outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Scars were evaluated >8 weeks. Primary outcome measures were Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores. Secondary outcome measures were surgeon satisfaction, duration of surgery, duration of hospitalization after the cesarean delivery, and complications of surgical site infection or wound disruption (hematoma or seroma). A sample of 104 women was needed to achieve a clinically significant effect with a power of 80%. Results Demographic characteristics, patients’ clinical background, prepregnancy body mass index, and subcutaneous thickness were similar in both groups. Length of surgery between the groups (37 ± 10 minutes for glue vs 39 ± 13 minutes for sutures, P =.515) was similar. Scores immediately after the wound closure were similar for both groups regarding surgeons’ time estimate of closure (P =.181) and closure appearance (P =.082). Surgeons’ satisfaction with the technique was significantly higher in the suture group (P =.003). No significant differences were found between the groups in blood loss, surgical site infection, length of postpartum hospitalization, or wound disruption. Glue and suture skin closure scores using Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale were similar 8 weeks after surgery, at P =.710 for patients and P =.568 for a physician observer. Conclusion Skin closure using glue or a monofilament synthetic suture had similar results. Both methods were shown to be safe and successful for skin closure after a scheduled cesarean delivery and, therefore, can be used based on surgeon and patient preferences.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014151748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.009
DO - 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.009
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 28153666
AN - SCOPUS:85014151748
SN - 0002-9378
VL - 216
SP - 406.e1-406.e5
JO - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
JF - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
IS - 4
ER -