Shinohara H, Matsuo K, Kikuchi N
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Matsumoto, Japan.
Ann Plast Surg. 1996 Jan;36(1):44-6. doi: 10.1097/00000637-199601000-00009.
Absorbable and nonabsorbable buried sutures were studied in primary cleft lip repair. Group 1 (N = 56) consisted of patients repaired with buried nonabsorbable material (monofilament nylon). Group 2 (N = 47) consisted of patients repaired with absorbable materials (polyglyconate, polydioxanone). All patients were monitored for 12 months. There were stitch abscesses in Group 1 (14%). There were no abscesses in Group 2. This difference was significant (p = 0.007). Abscesses were located in the suture line with no identifiable distribution. There was no significant difference in the cosmetic appearance of the scars in Groups 1 and 2. These results support the view that absorbable sutures are preferable to nonabsorbable sutures for primary cleft lip repair.
在一期唇裂修复术中对可吸收和不可吸收的埋藏缝线进行了研究。第1组（N = 56）由使用不可吸收埋藏材料（单丝尼龙）修复的患者组成。第2组（N = 47）由使用可吸收材料（聚乙醇酸、聚二氧六环酮）修复的患者组成。所有患者均接受了12个月的监测。第1组出现缝线脓肿（14%）。第2组未出现脓肿。这种差异具有统计学意义（p = 0.007）。脓肿位于缝线处，无明显分布规律。第1组和第2组瘢痕的外观无显著差异。这些结果支持以下观点：在一期唇裂修复中，可吸收缝线比不可吸收缝线更可取。
