Alawode Akeem O, Adeyemi Michael O, James Olutayo, Ogunlewe Mobolanle O, Butali Azeez, Adeyemo Wasiu L
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, Gbagada General Hospital, Lagos, Nigeria.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.
J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Aug;44(4):159-166. doi: 10.5125/jkaoms.2018.44.4.159. Epub 2018 Aug 29.
The aim of the study was to compare wound healing complications following the use of either absorbable or non-absorbable sutures for skin closure in cleft lip repair.
This was a randomized controlled trial conducted at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Lagos University Teaching Hospital, Idi Araba, Lagos State, Nigeria. Sixty subjects who required either primary or secondary cleft lip repair and satisfied all the inclusion criteria were recruited and randomized into two groups (Vicryl group or Nylon group). The surgical wounds in all subjects were examined on 3rd, 7th, and 14th postoperative days (POD) for presence or absence of tissue reactivity, wound dehiscence, and local wound infection.
Hemorrhage, tissue reactivity, wound dehiscence, and local wound infection were identified as wound healing complications following cleft lip repair. The incidence of postoperative wound healing complications on POD3 was 33.3%. Tissue reactivity was more common throughout the evaluation period with the use of an absorbable (Vicryl) suture compared to a non-absorbable (Nylon) suture, although the difference was statistically significant only on POD7 (=0.002). There were no significant differences in the incidences of wound dehiscence and infection between the two groups throughout the observation period.
There were no statistically significant differences in the incidences of wound dehiscence and surgical site wound infection following the use of either Vicryl or Nylon for skin closure during cleft lip repair. However, more cases of tissue reactivity were recorded in the Vicryl group than in the Nylon group on POD7. Particular attention must be paid to detect the occurrence of wound healing complications, most especially tissue reactivity, whenever a Vicryl suture is used for skin closure in cleft lip repair.
本研究旨在比较唇裂修复术中使用可吸收缝线或不可吸收缝线进行皮肤缝合后的伤口愈合并发症情况。
这是一项在尼日利亚拉各斯州伊迪阿巴市拉各斯大学教学医院口腔颌面外科进行的随机对照试验。招募了60名需要进行一期或二期唇裂修复且满足所有纳入标准的受试者,并将其随机分为两组(薇乔组或尼龙组)。在术后第3天、第7天和第14天检查所有受试者的手术伤口,观察有无组织反应、伤口裂开及局部伤口感染情况。
出血、组织反应、伤口裂开及局部伤口感染被确定为唇裂修复术后的伤口愈合并发症。术后第3天伤口愈合并发症的发生率为33.3%。在整个评估期内,使用可吸收(薇乔)缝线时组织反应比使用不可吸收(尼龙)缝线更为常见,尽管仅在术后第7天差异有统计学意义(P = 0.002)。在整个观察期内,两组伤口裂开和感染的发生率无显著差异。
唇裂修复术中使用薇乔或尼龙进行皮肤缝合后,伤口裂开和手术部位伤口感染的发生率无统计学显著差异。然而,在术后第7天,薇乔组记录到的组织反应病例比尼龙组更多。在唇裂修复术中使用薇乔缝线进行皮肤缝合时,必须特别注意检测伤口愈合并发症的发生,尤其是组织反应。