Closure of the trans‐columellar incision in open septorhinoplasty in 100 patients: Use of an absorbable multifilament suture

Ashraf, Naeem; Foden, Neil; D’Souza, Alwyn

doi:10.1111/coa.12861

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sutures used in the study were non-absorbable Prolene® and absorbable Vicryl Rapide®. The study did not report any statistically significant (p=0.39) difference in scar rating and patient satisfaction with the use of either suture materials [14]. In another report, Alijanpour et al analyzed 15 research papers comparing absorbable and non-absorbable sutures for outcomes including wound aesthetics and comfort in patients undergoing open rhinoplasty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The results suggested that none of the suture materials hindered wound healing, and there was a low incidence of wound complications with all of the used suture materials that did not reach statistical significance [ 19 ]. Other reports advocate the use of catgut as an absorbable suture as it is absorbable, has good tensile strength, is more comfortable for the patients as it spares them the pain of suture removal, leads to excellent wound healing, and has comparable rates of complications to other absorbable and non-absorbable suture materials [ 14 , 15 , 19 , 20 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Catgut Versus Polypropylene Sutures for Transcolumellar Incision Closure in Open Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Aldhabaan

Hudise

ALqarny

et al. 2020

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Open rhinoplasty, including the transcolumellar approach, is commonly performed as it has fewer side effects and provides superior anatomical control to the surgeons compared to closed rhinoplasty. However, the postoperative scar outcomes, such as scar appearance, vary depending on the type of suture used in wound closure, and the optimal suture type is not firmly established. Objective To compare the impact of catgut versus polypropylene sutures on the postoperative transcolumellar scar outcomes and patient satisfaction following open rhinoplasty. Methods This retrospective cohort study, including 100 patients who underwent transcolumellar open rhinoplasty, was conducted at otolaryngology department of King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Riyadh, KSA. The patients were divided into two groups: the propylene suture group (group 1), which included 15 males and 35 females with a mean age of 31.5 years and underwent surgery using propylene sutures, and the catgut suture group (group 2), which included 10 males and 40 females with a mean age of 30.5 years and underwent surgery using catgut sutures. The postoperative transcolumellar scar outcomes, as determined by visual analogue scale (VAS) and Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) scores, and patient satisfaction, as assessed using a self-assessment scale, were compared between groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catgut Versus Polypropylene Sutures for Transcolumellar Incision Closure in Open Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Aldhabaan

Hudise

ALqarny

et al. 2020

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the present study, there was no significant difference in using Polypropylene or monocryl suture regarding closing of alar base wound, subjectively patients did not notice a difference in outcome based on suture type. A study by Ashraf et al 16 was conducted on 100 patients who underwent open rhinoplasty and closure of the trans columellar incision by using and absorbable vicryl and non-absorbable prolene suture; the study showed that there was no significant differences in scar scores between the 2 groups of patients (P ¼ .39). This is in agreement with our study, where the 2 groups showed no significant difference in scar score.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison Between Using Monocryl Suture and Polypropylene Suture in Closure of Alar Base Excision in Rhinoplasty

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rhinoplasty is one of the most common surgery that act as a challenge for consistent outstanding results. Alar base reduction is a technique of rhinoplasty that is prescribed in many conditions. Wound closure requires using of sutures and there are several types of sutures for this purpose; however, good scar results are necessary for patients’satisfaction. Aim: To evaluate alar base resection scar results after surgical resection using different types of suturing material. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study that was conducted at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study was performed by reviewing patient’s records and performing post-operative photography for patient who underwent alar base resection. The patients were divided into 2 groups, the first group of patients had the alar base wound closed with interrupted Polypropylene 6/0 and the other group wound was closed with monocryl 6/0 sutures. Visual analogs scale was used to investigate basal views. Results: The study included 80 patients divided into 2 groups, each group included 40 patients, in the first group (Polypropylene group) there were 25% males and 75% females with a total mean age of 32 years, whereas in the second group (monocryl) there were 15% and 85% males and females, respectively. There were 85% and 82.5% unnoticeable scar reported by the first and second group, respectively; however there was no significant difference between the 2 groups ( P = .75). Conclusion: Both Polypropylene and monocryl suture result in the same result for closing alar base wound post surgically.

show abstract

“…However, they should be removed at one week postoperative. removal nonabsorbable suture may traumatize the patient and can time consuming for the surgeon regarding postoperative following period, but Absorbable sutures do not require removal, therefore, can reduce anxiety of patient postoperatively [9][10][11][12]. The study was aimed at evaluation absorbable and non-absorbable sutures in closure trans columellar incision regarding patient discomfort, scarring and the risk for postoperative infection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dissatisfaction, infection and other complications were not reported. Although, in terms of scar there was no difference in two groups, but with absorbable suture, patients were more comfortable [11]. In Ahmet for surgeons to removal them [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Closure of the Trans-Columellar Incision in Open Rhinoplasty: Absorbable or Nonabsorable Suture?

Armoeyan¹

2019

BJSTR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Open rhinoplasty is common technique because of easy and good access to the nasal building. However, the technique varies from surgeon to surgeon and according to which suture material is used to closure the Columella cut regarding beautifully and scar. Good scar results are important for patient satisfaction. Absorbable and non-absorbable suture materials are used in surgical wound closure.Method: This study was conducted with key words that include of rhinoplasty, cosmetic techniques, wound closure techniques in data bases such as google scholar, web of sciences, pubmed, embase, sciencedirect between 2014 to 2019. Inclusion criteria include of Primary rhinoplasty with Inverted-V incision, English language study and Suture is performed by one surgeon. 15 study was included, and two authors read abstract carefully and if study not compared two methods use of absorbable and nonabsorbable suture in Transcolumellar incision were excluded. Finally, three articles were selected for this research. Informed consent not recommended in review article. Conclusion:Results did not show the difference between the use of absorbable or nonabsorbable suture in terms of the scar but the use of absorbable suture for the patient and surgeon can be effective in terms of comfort, anxiety and working hours for removal it (respectively).

show abstract

Closure of the trans‐columellar incision in open septorhinoplasty in 100 patients: Use of an absorbable multifilament suture

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

Catgut Versus Polypropylene Sutures for Transcolumellar Incision Closure in Open Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Catgut Versus Polypropylene Sutures for Transcolumellar Incision Closure in Open Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Comparison Between Using Monocryl Suture and Polypropylene Suture in Closure of Alar Base Excision in Rhinoplasty

Closure of the Trans-Columellar Incision in Open Rhinoplasty: Absorbable or Nonabsorable Suture?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About