Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (대한구강악안면외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A comparative study of immediate wound healing complications following cleft lip repair using either absorbable or non-absorbable skin sutures

  • Alawode, Akeem O. (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, Gbagada General Hospital) ;
  • Adeyemi, Michael O. (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos) ;
  • James, Olutayo (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos) ;
  • Ogunlewe, Mobolanle O. (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos) ;
  • Butali, Azeez (Department of Oral Pathology, Radiology and Medicine, College of Dentistry, University of Iowa) ;
  • Adeyemo, Wasiu L. (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos)
  • Received : 2017.07.27
  • Accepted : 2017.09.20
  • Published : 2018.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: 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. Materials and Methods: 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. Results: 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 (P=0.002). There were no significant differences in the incidences of wound dehiscence and infection between the two groups throughout the observation period. Conclusion: 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.

Keywords

References

  1. Costello BJ, Ruiz RL. Cleft lip and palate: comprehensive treatment planning and primary repair. In: Miloro M, Ghali GE, Larsen P, Waite P, Peterson LJ, eds. Peterson's principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2nd ed. Hamilton: BC Decker; 2004:839-58.
  2. Goodacre T, Swan MC. Cleft lip and palate: current management. Paediatr Child Health 2008;6:283-92.
  3. Olasoji HO, Dogo D, Obiano K, Yawe T. Cleft lip and palate in north eastern Nigeria. Nig Q J Hosp Med 1997;7:209-13.
  4. Sitversen A, Wilcox A, Johnson GE, Abyholm F, Vindenes HA, Lie RT. Prevalence of major anatomic variations in oral clefts. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;121:587-95. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000297839.78179.f5
  5. Eigbobo JO, Akadiri OA. Pattern of cleft lip and palate deformities and associated anomalies in a selected Nigerian population. Niger J Plast Surg 2011;7:59-64.
  6. Adeola DS, Ononiwu CN, Eguma SA. Cleft lip and palate in northern Nigerian children. Ann Afr Med 2003;2:6-8.
  7. Robin NH, Baty H, Franklin J, Guyton FC, Mann J, Woolley AL, et al. The multidisciplinary evaluation and management of cleft lip and palate. South Med J 2006;99:1111-20. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.smj.0000209093.78617.3a
  8. Shinohara H, Matsuo K, Kikuchi N. Absorbable and nonabsorbable buried sutures for primary cleft lip repair. Ann Plast Surg 1996;36:44-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000637-199601000-00009
  9. Kudur MH, Pai SB, Sripathi H, Prabhu S. Sutures and suturing techniques in skin closure. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2009;75:425-34. https://doi.org/10.4103/0378-6323.53155
  10. Herrmann JB, Kelly RJ, Higgins GA. Polyglycolic acid sutures. Laboratory and clinical evaluation of a new absorbable suture material. Arch Surg 1970;100:486-90. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.1970.01340220162027
  11. Saleh F, Palmieri B, Lodi D, Al-Sebeih K. An innovative method to evaluate the suture compliance in sealing the surgical wound lips. Int J Med Sci 2008;5:354-60.
  12. Choudhary S, Cadier MA. Cleft lip repair: rub off the sutures, not the smile! Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105:1566.
  13. Edward E III. Management of patients with orofacial clefts. In: Peterson LJ, Ellis E, Hupp JR, Tucker MR, eds. Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2003:633-55.
  14. Gabrielli F, Potenza C, Puddu P, Sera F, Masini C, Abeni D. Suture materials and other factors associated with tissue reactivity, infection, and wound dehiscence among plastic surgery outpatients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:38-45. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200101000-00007
  15. Abdurrazaq TO, Micheal AO, Lanre AW, Olugbenga OM, Akin LL. Surgical outcome and complications following cleft lip and palate repair in a teaching hospital in Nigeria. Afr J Paediatr Surg 2013;10:345-57. https://doi.org/10.4103/0189-6725.125447
  16. Ugburo AO, Desalu I, Adekola AF, Fadeyibi IO. Day case cleft lip surgery in Lagos, Nigeria. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2009;46:636-41. https://doi.org/10.1597/07-156.1
  17. Kim TH, Rothkopf DM. Ambulatory surgery for cleft lip repair. Ann Plast Surg 1999;42:442-4. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000637-199904000-00016
  18. Khosla RH, Mabry K, Castiglione CL. Clinical outcomes of the Furlow Z-plasty for primary cleft palate repair. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2008;45:501-10. https://doi.org/10.1597/07-063.1
  19. Lees VC, Pigott RW. Early postoperative complications in primary cleft lip and palate surgery--how soon may we discharge patients from hospital? Br J Plast Surg 1992;45:232-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1226(92)90084-B
  20. Demey A, Vadoud-seyedi J, Demol F, Govaerts M. Early postoperative complications in primary cleft lip and palate surgery. Eur J Plast Surg 1997;20:77-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01419137
  21. Kanzler MH, Gorsulowsky DC, Swanson NA. Basic mechanisms in the healing cutaneous wound. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1986;12:1156-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.1986.tb02099.x
  22. Yamaguchi Y, Yoshikawa K. Cutaneous wound healing: an update. J Dermatol 2001;28:521-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1346-8138.2001.tb00025.x
  23. Parell GJ, Becker GD. Comparison of absorbable with non-absorbable with sutures in closure of facial skin wounds. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2003;5:488-90. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.5.6.488
  24. Edwards DJ, Elson RA. Skin closure using nylon and polydioxanone: a comparison of results. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1995;40:342-3.
  25. Mouzas GL, Yeadon A. Does the choice of suture material affect the incidence of wound infection? A comparison of dexon (polyglycolic acid) sutures with other commonly used sutures in an accident and emergency department. Br J Surg 1975;62:952-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800621207
  26. Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N. Robbins and Cotran pathologic basis of disease. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2005:113-7.
  27. Holger JS, Wandersee SC, Hale DB. Cosmetic outcomes of facial lacerations repaired with tissue-adhesive, absorbable, and nonabsorbable sutures. Am J Emerg Med 2004;22:254-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2004.02.009
  28. Karounis H, Gouin S, Chalut D, Pelletier H, Williams B. A randomized controlled trial comparing long term cosmetic outcomes of traumatic pediatric lacerations repaired with absorbable plain gut versus nonabsorbable nylon sutures. Acad Emerg Med 2004;11:730-5. https://doi.org/10.1197/j.aem.2003.12.029
  29. Rosen H, Barrios LM, Reinisch JF, Macgill K, Meara JG. Outpatient cleft lip repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;112:381-7; discussion 388-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PRS.0000070721.78741.EB
  30. Reinisch JF, Li WY, Urata MM. Complications of cleft lip and palate surgery. In: Losee J, Kirschner R, eds. Comprehensive cleft care. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2009:115-20.
  31. Schettler D. Intra- and postoperative complications in surgical repair of clefts in infancy. J Maxillofac Surg 1973;1:40-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0503(73)80011-6
  32. Tempest MN. Some observations on blood loss in hare-lip and cleft palate surgery. Br J Plast Surg 1958-9;11:34-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1226(58)80004-1
  33. Okamoto T, Rosini KS, Miyahara GI, Gabrielli MF. Healing process of the gingival mucosa and dental alveolus following tooth extraction and suture with polyglycolic acid and polyglactin 910 threads. Comparative histomorphologic study in rats. Braz Dent J 1994;5:35-43.
  34. Silverstein LH, Kurtzman GM. A review of dental suturing for optimal soft-tissue management. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005;26:163-6, 169-70; quiz 171, 209.
  35. Katz S, Izhar M, Mirelman D. Bacterial adherence to surgical sutures. A possible factor in suture induced infection. Ann Surg 1981;194:35-41. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-198107000-00007
  36. Mofikoya BO, Adeyemo WL, Ugburo AO. An overview of biological basis of pathologic scarring. Niger Postgrad Med J 2012;19:40-5.
  37. Hochberg J, Meyer KM, Marion MD. Suture choice and other methods of skin closure. Surg Clin North Am 2009;89:627-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2009.03.001
  38. Leknes KN, Roynstrand IT, Selvig KA. Human gingival tissue reactions to silk and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene sutures. J Periodontol 2005;76:34-42. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2005.76.1.34
  39. Tajirian AL, Goldberg DJ. A review of sutures and other skin closure materials. J Cosmet Laser Ther 2010;12:296-302. https://doi.org/10.3109/14764172.2010.538413
  40. Marcusson A, Paulin G, Ostrup L. Facial appearance in adults who had cleft lip and palate treated in childhood. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 2002;36:16-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/028443102753478327
  41. Rothenburger S, Spangler D, Bhende S, Burkley D. In vitro antimicrobial evaluation of coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (coated polyglactin 910 with triclosan) using zone of inhibition assays. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2002;3 Suppl 1:S79-87. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2002.3.s1-79
  42. Murphy PG, Tadros E, Cross S, MCh DH, Burke PE, Kent P, et al. Skin closure and the incidence of groin wound infection: a prospective study. Ann Vasc Surg 1995;9:480-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02143863

Cited by

  1. Classification of the journal category "oral surgery" in the Scopus and the Science Citation Index Expanded: flaws and suggestions vol.45, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2019.45.4.186
  2. Perioperative Management of Cleft Lip Repair: A Meta-Analysis and Clinical Practice Guideline vol.58, pp.10, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620984909
  3. Comparing the Treatment Outcomes of Absorbable Sutures, Nonabsorbable Sutures, and Tissue Adhesives in Cleft Lip Repair: A Systematic Review vol.59, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665621996107