Undermining during cutaneous wound closure for wounds less than 3 cm in diameter: a randomized split wound comparative effectiveness trial

Comparing Cosmetic Outcomes of Straight-Line Versus W-Plasty Techniques for Linear Postauricular Wound Closure: A Randomized Evaluator Blind Split-Scar Trial

BACKGROUND

Surgeons' opinions vary on the cosmetic outcome of straight-line (SL) versus broken-line (W-plasty) closure methods. To date, no studies have compared the 2 techniques in the split-scar design model that resolves the confounding individual patient factors that affects the scar outcome.

OBJECTIVE

Compare outcomes and wound cosmesis with SL versus W-plasty closure techniques.

METHODS

This clinical trial was conducted with 50 linear surgical wounds randomized to SL closure on half and W-plasty on the other half. At 3 months, patients and 2 masked observers evaluated each scar using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale [POSAS]).

RESULTS

The mean (SD) sum of the POSAS observer component scores were 16.6 (6.18) for the SL side and 15.5 (6.37) for the W-plasty side ( p = .49). The mean (SD) sum of the POSAS patient scores were 14.4 (6.8) in SL and 15.1 (8.2) in W-plasty ( p = .59). The mean (SD) complications were 0.08 (0.06) for SL and 0.02 (0.14) for W-plasty ( p = .18).

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant difference in wound cosmesis or complications was noted between SL versus W-plasty closure techniques. Surgeons may want to consider whether the extra time involved in placing zigzag W-plasty lines is worthwhile.

Aesthetic outcome of intermediate closure versus intermediate closure followed by 2-octyl cyanoacrylate: A randomized evaluator-blinded split-wound comparative effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND

Dermatologic surgeons are increasingly using surgical adhesives in their practice. Studies comparing sutured wounds to those that utilize a combination of suturing and skin adhesive have not been previously conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cosmetic outcome and patient wound care satisfaction of an intermediate suture closure with an intermediate suture closure followed by the application of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate (2-OCA).

METHODS

Fifty patients were enrolled in a randomized, evaluator-blinded, split-scar study. Following intermediate sutured closure of a surgical defect, one side of the wound was randomized to receive an additional application of 2-OCA. After 3 months, the scar was assessed using the POSAS tool and patients reported wound care preferences.

RESULTS

As the primary outcome measure, the mean sum of observer POSAS was 12.80 for sutured closure alone versus 12.40 for sutured closures followed by 2-OCA (P = .49).

LIMITATIONS

Single-center study of a relatively homogenous population.

CONCLUSION

Although there were no significant differences in scar cosmesis, both patients and observers tended to prefer the side with an additional application of 2-OCA in most POSAS components, in overall opinion, and in patient wound care satisfaction. Dermatologic surgeons may add this to their practice without sacrificing scar outcomes or patient satisfaction.