Department of Dermatology, University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, Sacramento, California.
Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento, California.
Dermatol Surg. 2020 May;46(5):628-634. doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000002076.
Although the use of 2-octylcyanoacrylate (OCA) in cutaneous surgery offers increased efficiency, there is scant data comparing scar outcomes achieved with OCA versus 5-0 fast-absorbing gut suture (FG).
To compare scar cosmesis achieved with OCA versus FG for surgical wound closure.
A total of 44 patients with postoperative defects of at least 3 cm were included. Half of each wound was randomized to receive closure with either OCA or FG. At 3 months, patients and 2 blinded observers evaluated each scar using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS).
The total observer POSAS score (mean [SD]) for the side repaired with OCA (12.3 [4.72]) and the side that received FG (11.6 [4.36]) did not differ significantly (p = .40). There was no significant difference in the total patient POSAS scores between closure with OCA (14.9 [8.67]) and FG (14.6 [8.90]) (p = .70). Based on observer POSAS scores, scar pigmentation was significantly worse on the scar half repaired with OCA (1.98 [0.91]) compared with FG (1.79 [0.80]) (p = .05).
With the exception of inferior scar pigmentation with OCA, there was no statistically significant difference in wound cosmesis after linear wound closure with OCA versus FG.
虽然在皮肤外科中使用 2-辛基氰基丙烯酸酯(OCA)可提高效率,但比较 OCA 与 5-0 快吸收肠缝线(FG)在瘢痕结局方面的差异的数据却很少。
比较 OCA 与 FG 用于手术切口闭合的瘢痕美容效果。
共纳入至少 3cm 术后缺损的 44 例患者。每个伤口的一半随机接受 OCA 或 FG 闭合。术后 3 个月,患者和 2 名盲法观察者使用患者和观察者瘢痕评估量表(POSAS)评估每个瘢痕。
用 OCA 修复的一侧(12.3 [4.72])和用 FG 修复的一侧(11.6 [4.36])的总观察者 POSAS 评分(平均值[标准差])无显著差异(p =.40)。用 OCA(14.9 [8.67])和 FG(14.6 [8.90])闭合的总患者 POSAS 评分之间也无显著差异(p =.70)。根据观察者 POSAS 评分,用 OCA 修复的瘢痕半侧的瘢痕色素沉着明显差于 FG(1.98 [0.91])(p =.05)。
除 OCA 组的瘢痕色素沉着较差外,OCA 与 FG 线性闭合伤口后,在伤口美容效果方面无统计学显著差异。