6-0 nylon versus 6-0 vicryl rapide in chieloplasty

Abstract

Context:Facial cosmetic result is one of the most concerning issues for the parents who get their children operated for cleft lip. Moreover, the discomfort associated with the suture removal encourages one to use any new technology that may replace the need for suture placement. The type of suture material used in surgery has been a long-standing debate among surgeons. In this study, we compared rapidly absorbable suture material (Vicryl Rapide™) with nonabsorbable suture material (nylon).Aims:The aim of this study is to compare the appearance and course of scar, wound infection, and patient's parent perception using Vicryl Rapide and nylon in nonsyndromic congenital cleft lip repair.Settings and Design:This was a randomized prospective controlled clinical trial.Materials and Methods:Twenty patients, in the age group of 3–18 months treated for unilateral congenital cleft lip deformity, were included and randomly allocated to two groups with ten patients each. Skin suturing was done with 6-0 polyamide and 6-0 irradiated polyglactin in Groups A and B, respectively. Patients were evaluated at 1 week, 1, 3, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively in person by the observer as well as by the patient's parent.Statistical Analysis Used:Descriptive statistical analysis was done using SPSS 20, and Student's t-test was applied.Results:It was found that Vicryl Rapide showed more hypopigmented scars and raised scars than nylon at the end of 1 year though overall appearance was comparable between the groups.Conclusions:Vicryl Rapide showed poorer cosmetic outcomes in terms of height and pigmentation of car as compared to nylon suture of same thickness. However, since scars tend to improve with time, a bigger sample size and a longer follow-up are required to generalize this statement.

Precut Cast: An Easier and Less Stressful Cast Removal Procedure for Pediatric Patients

“…Some authors reported usefulness of skin closure using absorbable sutures. [26][27][28][29] However, in our cases, we did not use absorbable sutures for either the skin grafting site or the donor site because delayed absorption of the absorbable suture, 26 suture-related pseudoinfection 27 and pigmentation after inflammation 28 were reported. As a result, patients felt mild pain during the removal of surgical sutures.…”

Retraction: 6-0 nylon versus 6-0 vicrylrapide in chieloplasty

“…It has been brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief that the article entitled “6-0 nylon versus 6-0 vicrylrapide in chieloplasty” published in Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery on pages 272-277, issue 2, volume 6,[ 1 ] is a duplicate of a paper that has already been published on pages 83-86, issue 2, volume 3 as “Comparative analysis of 6-0 nylon and 6-0 vicrylrapide in congenital unilateral cleft lip repair” in Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies. [ 2 ] Duplicate publication violates the editorial policy of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors as set forth in the Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery Information for Authors and as codified in the signed statements made by the corresponding author regarding the copyright of their work.…”