Photographic assessment of post-surgical facial scars epidermally sutured with rapidly-absorbable polyglactin 910 or nylon: A randomized clinical trial.
Surgeons use absorbable and non-absorbable sutures for epidermal wound closure. No large, randomized studies have compared the effect of these suture types on facial scar appearance.To assess post-surgical facial scar appearance using either rapidly-absorbable polyglactin 910 or nylon for epidermal closure.Randomized, blinded, split-scar clinical trial. 105 patients with facial wounds resulting from MMS excisions were randomized for epidermal closure using rapidly-absorbable 5-0 polyglactin 910 (Vicryl Rapide™) on one half of the repair, and 5-0 nylon (Ethilon™) on the other half. Two physicians (one dermatologist, one plastic surgeon), unaware of original suture location, examined photographs of each healed wound at six-months postoperative and graded the appearance of each half of the scar using the visual analog scale (VAS), wound evaluation scale (WES), and Stony Brook scar evaluation scale (SBSES).At six-months there was no significant difference in the combined mean (SD) VAS scores [83.1(14.2) and 83.0(13.7)], SBSES scores [4.3(0.9) and 4.4(0.9)], WES scores [5.3(1.1) and 5.2(1.1)] for rapidly-absorbable polyglactin 910 vs nylon (P= .72, .57, .21 respectively).Single institution CONCLUSIONS: Both rapidly-absorbable polyglactin 910 and nylon sutures placed through epidermis resulted in an equivalent photographic appearance of facial scars at six-months postoperatively.