J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg.  2018 Aug;44(4):159-166. 10.5125/jkaoms.2018.44.4.159.

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

• Alawode AO
• Adeyemi MO
• James O
• Ogunlewe M
• Butali A
• Adeyemo WL

• KMID: 2419231
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2018.44.4.159

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.

Keyword

Wound healing; Orofacial cleft; Absorbable; Non-absorbable; Sutures

MeSH Terms

Cleft Lip*
Hemorrhage
Hospitals, Teaching
Incidence
Nigeria
Nylons
Polyglactin 910
Skin*
Surgery, Oral
Sutures*
Wound Healing*
Wound Infection
Wounds and Injuries*
Nylons
Polyglactin 910

Reference

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, editors. Peterson's principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2nd ed. Hamilton: BC Decker;2004. p. 839–858.

2. Goodacre T, Swan MC. Cleft lip and palate: current management. Paediatr Child Health. 2008; 6:283–292.

3. Olasoji HO, Dogo D, Obiano K, Yawe T. Cleft lip and palate in north eastern Nigeria. Nig Q J Hosp Med. 1997; 7:209–213.

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; 121:587–595. PMID: 18300979.

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; 99:1111–1120. PMID: 17100032.

8. Shinohara H, Matsuo K, Kikuchi N. Absorbable and nonabsorbable buried sutures for primary cleft lip repair. Ann Plast Surg. 1996; 36:44–46. PMID: 8722983.

9. Kudur MH, Pai SB, Sripathi H, Prabhu S. Sutures and suturing techniques in skin closure. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2009; 75:425–434. PMID: 19584482.

10. Herrmann JB, Kelly RJ, Higgins GA. Polyglycolic acid sutures. Laboratory and clinical evaluation of a new absorbable suture material. Arch Surg. 1970; 100:486–490. PMID: 5417172.

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; 5:354–360. PMID: 19015745.

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, editors. Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby;2003. p. 633–655.

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. PMID: 11176599.

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; 10:345–357. PMID: 24469486.

16. Ugburo AO, Desalu I, Adekola AF, Fadeyibi IO. Day case cleft lip surgery in Lagos, Nigeria. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009; 46:636–641. PMID: 19860488.

17. Kim TH, Rothkopf DM. Ambulatory surgery for cleft lip repair. Ann Plast Surg. 1999; 42:442–444. PMID: 10213408.

18. Khosla RH, Mabry K, Castiglione CL. Clinical outcomes of the Furlow Z-plasty for primary cleft palate repair. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008; 45:501–510. PMID: 18788872.

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; 45:232–234. PMID: 1596665.

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; 20:77–79.

21. Kanzler MH, Gorsulowsky DC, Swanson NA. Basic mechanisms in the healing cutaneous wound. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1986; 12:1156–1164. PMID: 3490500.

22. Yamaguchi Y, Yoshikawa K. Cutaneous wound healing: an update. J Dermatol. 2001; 28:521–534. PMID: 11732719.

23. Parell GJ, Becker GD. Comparison of absorbable with non-absorbable with sutures in closure of facial skin wounds. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2003; 5:488–490. PMID: 14623686.

24. Edwards DJ, Elson RA. Skin closure using nylon and polydioxanone: a comparison of results. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1995; 40:342–343. PMID: 8523317.

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; 62:952–955. PMID: 1106807.

26. Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N. Robbins and Cotran pathologic basis of disease. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders;2005. p. 113–117.

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; 22:254–257. PMID: 15258862.

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; 11:730–735. PMID: 15231459.

29. Rosen H, Barrios LM, Reinisch JF, Macgill K, Meara JG. Outpatient cleft lip repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003; 112:381–387. discussion 388-9. PMID: 12900594.

30. Reinisch JF, Li WY, Urata MM. Complications of cleft lip and palate surgery. In : Losee J, Kirschner R, editors. Comprehensive cleft care. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical;2009. p. 115–120.

31. Schettler D. Intra- and postoperative complications in surgical repair of clefts in infancy. J Maxillofac Surg. 1973; 1:40–44. PMID: 4521447.

32. Tempest MN. Some observations on blood loss in hare-lip and cleft palate surgery. Br J Plast Surg. 1958-9; 11:34–44.

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. PMID: 7833640.

34. Silverstein LH, Kurtzman GM. A review of dental suturing for optimal soft-tissue management. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2005; 26:163–166. 169–170. quiz 171, 209. PMID: 15813570.

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. PMID: 7018429.

36. Mofikoya BO, Adeyemo WL, Ugburo AO. An overview of biological basis of pathologic scarring. Niger Postgrad Med J. 2012; 19:40–45. PMID: 22430601.

37. Hochberg J, Meyer KM, Marion MD. Suture choice and other methods of skin closure. Surg Clin North Am. 2009; 89:627–641. PMID: 19465201.

38. Leknes KN, Røynstrand IT, Selvig KA. Human gingival tissue reactions to silk and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene sutures. J Periodontol. 2005; 76:34–42. PMID: 15830635.

39. Tajirian AL, Goldberg DJ. A review of sutures and other skin closure materials. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2010; 12:296–302. PMID: 21142740.

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. PMID: 11925823.

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–S87. PMID: 12573042.

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; 9:480–482. PMID: 8541198.