Maloney Joseph, Rogers Gary S, Kapadia Mitesh
Beverly Hospital Oncology Care Center, Beverly, MA, USA.
J Drugs Dermatol. 2013 Jul 1;12(7):810-4.
The use of medical adhesives for topical wound closure is gaining in popularity over conventional wound closure materials such as sutures and staples. Adhesives provide advantages in both wound closure and patient management with good cosmetic outcome and surgeon and patient satisfaction reported.
To compare the use of two currently marketed medical adhesives; LiquiBand® Flow Control and High Viscosity Dermabond ™ for the topical closure of surgical incisions.
In a prospective blinded manner, subjects were randomly assigned LiquiBand® or DermabondTM for topical closure of a surgical incision. Variables compared included ease of use, time taken to close wound, subject and surgeon satisfaction with device and wound closure, cosmetic outcome at 90 days, and complication rates.
Use of both devices resulted in effective wound closure with similar high levels of cosmesis subject and surgeon satisfaction, with only minor complications reported. There was no statistically significant difference between the devices for all the parameters studied, with the exception that the Liquiband device was found to significantly reduce the amount of time required for closure.
As the two devices appear substantially equivalent in terms of key surgeon and patient variables, product cost should be the primary determinant in selection of the tissue glue device.
与传统的伤口闭合材料（如缝线和吻合钉）相比，医用粘合剂用于局部伤口闭合越来越受欢迎。粘合剂在伤口闭合和患者管理方面具有优势，据报道具有良好的美容效果，医生和患者满意度也较高。
比较两种目前市场上销售的医用粘合剂；LiquiBand®流量控制型和高粘度皮肤粘合剂Dermabond™用于手术切口的局部闭合。
以前瞻性盲法，将受试者随机分配使用LiquiBand®或Dermabond™进行手术切口的局部闭合。比较的变量包括易用性、伤口闭合所需时间、受试者和医生对器械及伤口闭合的满意度、90天时的美容效果以及并发症发生率。
两种器械的使用均实现了有效的伤口闭合，受试者和医生对美容效果的满意度都很高，仅报告了轻微并发症。在所研究的所有参数方面，两种器械之间没有统计学上的显著差异，但发现LiquiBand器械能显著减少闭合所需的时间。
由于两种器械在关键的医生和患者变量方面基本相当，产品成本应是选择组织胶水器械的主要决定因素。
