Tiwari Punit, Tiwari Astha, Kumar Suresh, Patil Rajkumar, Goel Amit, Sharma Pramod, Kundu Anup K
Department of Urology, SSKM Hospital, Institute of Post-Graduate Education and Research, Kolkata, WB, India.
Indian J Urol. 2011 Oct;27(4):475-8. doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.91435.
Traditionally, circumcision wounds are closed by absorbable sutures. However, certain alternative methods are also being utilized to overcome the shortcomings of the conventionally used method for circumcision wound closuring. In the current study, the use of tissue glue ((iso amyl 2-cyanoacrylate) has been compared with traditional suturing for the approximation of circumcision wounds. In our study, both the methods were found to be comparable with significantly less time consumed in glue group.
The purpose of the present study has been to compare directly cyanoacrylate as a better alternative to conventional suture material in terms of cosmetic result, time consumed and incidence of infection (comparative study).
The results of all the patients seen in outpatient department for circumcision were included in this study. The study was conducted from Aug 2009 to May 2010. The tissue glue (iso amyl 2-cyanoacrylate) was compared to sutures as a method of wound approximation in circumcision.
Tissue glue group has been observed to have less wound inflammation, bleeding or hematoma rate and was cosmetically superior as compared to suture group; however, none of these findings could reach statistically significant level. The mean time taken for circumcision was 14.2 min (SD 2.42), when tissue glue was used for wound approximation. However, it was 24.4 min (SD 5.06) in case of the use of sutures. This difference was found as highly significant (P value < 0.001). However, regarding postoperative pain no significant reduction was observed when glue was used.
This study showed that the use of tissue glue in comparison to sutures is having the following advantages: Cosmetically superiorLess time consuming All other parameters measured were nearly the same and statically insignificant.
传统上，包皮环切伤口用可吸收缝线缝合。然而，也在采用某些替代方法来克服传统包皮环切伤口缝合方法的缺点。在本研究中，已将组织胶水（异戊基 2 - 氰基丙烯酸酯）用于包皮环切伤口对合的情况与传统缝合进行了比较。在我们的研究中，发现两种方法具有可比性，胶水组耗时显著更少。
本研究的目的是在美容效果、耗时和感染发生率方面（对比研究），直接比较氰基丙烯酸酯作为传统缝合材料的更好替代品。
本研究纳入了门诊所有接受包皮环切术患者的结果。研究于2009年8月至2010年5月进行。将组织胶水（异戊基 2 - 氰基丙烯酸酯）与缝线作为包皮环切伤口对合的方法进行比较。
观察到组织胶水组伤口炎症、出血或血肿发生率更低，在美容方面优于缝线组；然而，这些发现均未达到统计学显著水平。当使用组织胶水进行伤口对合时，包皮环切术的平均用时为14.2分钟（标准差2.42）。然而，使用缝线时平均用时为24.4分钟（标准差5.06）。发现这种差异具有高度显著性（P值<0.001）。然而，关于术后疼痛，使用胶水时未观察到显著减轻。
本研究表明，与缝线相比，使用组织胶水具有以下优点：美容效果更佳耗时更少所有其他测量参数几乎相同且无统计学意义。
