A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing absorbable barbed sutures versus conventional absorbable sutures for dermal closure in open surgical procedures

J. Peter Rubin, Joseph P. Hunstad, Alain Polynice, Jeffrey A. Gusenoff, Thomas Schoeller, Raymond Dunn, Klaus J. Walgenbach, Juliana Hansen

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    32 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: Barbed sutures were developed to reduce operative time and improve security of wound closure. Objective: The authors compare absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) with conventional (smooth) absorbable sutures for soft tissue approximation. Method: A prospective multicenter randomized study comparing barbed sutures with smooth sutures was undertaken between August 13, 2009, and January 31, 2010, in 241 patients undergoing abdominoplasty, mastopexy, and reduction mammaplasty. Each patient received barbed sutures on 1 side of the body, with deep dermal sutures eliminated or reduced. Smooth sutures with deep dermal and subcuticular closure were used on the other side as a control. The primary endpoint was dermal closure time. Safety was assessed through adverse event reporting through a 12-week follow-up. Results: A total of 229 patients were ultimately treated (115 with slow-absorbing polymer and 114 with rapid-absorbing polymer). Mean dermal closure time was significantly quicker with the barbed suture compared with the smooth suture (12.0 vs 19.2 minutes; P <.001), primarily due to the need for fewer deep dermal sutures. The rapid-absorbing barbed suture showed a complication profile equivalent to the smooth suture, while the slow-absorbing barbed suture had a higher incidence of minor suture extrusion. Conclusions: Barbed sutures enabled faster dermal closure quicker than smooth sutures, with a comparable complication profile.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)272-283
    Number of pages12
    JournalAesthetic Surgery Journal
    Volume34
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Feb 2014

    Fingerprint

    Sutures
    Randomized Controlled Trials
    Skin
    Polymers
    Abdominoplasty
    Mammaplasty
    Operative Time
    Multicenter Studies

    Keywords

    • abdominal wound closure
    • absorbable barbed sutures
    • absorbable smooth sutures
    • body contouring
    • mammaplasty
    • sutures
    • wound closure techniques

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Surgery

    Cite this

    A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing absorbable barbed sutures versus conventional absorbable sutures for dermal closure in open surgical procedures. / Rubin, J. Peter; Hunstad, Joseph P.; Polynice, Alain; Gusenoff, Jeffrey A.; Schoeller, Thomas; Dunn, Raymond; Walgenbach, Klaus J.; Hansen, Juliana.

    In: Aesthetic Surgery Journal, Vol. 34, No. 2, 02.2014, p. 272-283.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Rubin, J. Peter ; Hunstad, Joseph P. ; Polynice, Alain ; Gusenoff, Jeffrey A. ; Schoeller, Thomas ; Dunn, Raymond ; Walgenbach, Klaus J. ; Hansen, Juliana. / A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing absorbable barbed sutures versus conventional absorbable sutures for dermal closure in open surgical procedures. In: Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2014 ; Vol. 34, No. 2. pp. 272-283.
    @article{53fe96fb51c44a61b1fe576aa1ebb03c,
    title = "A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing absorbable barbed sutures versus conventional absorbable sutures for dermal closure in open surgical procedures",
    abstract = "Background: Barbed sutures were developed to reduce operative time and improve security of wound closure. Objective: The authors compare absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) with conventional (smooth) absorbable sutures for soft tissue approximation. Method: A prospective multicenter randomized study comparing barbed sutures with smooth sutures was undertaken between August 13, 2009, and January 31, 2010, in 241 patients undergoing abdominoplasty, mastopexy, and reduction mammaplasty. Each patient received barbed sutures on 1 side of the body, with deep dermal sutures eliminated or reduced. Smooth sutures with deep dermal and subcuticular closure were used on the other side as a control. The primary endpoint was dermal closure time. Safety was assessed through adverse event reporting through a 12-week follow-up. Results: A total of 229 patients were ultimately treated (115 with slow-absorbing polymer and 114 with rapid-absorbing polymer). Mean dermal closure time was significantly quicker with the barbed suture compared with the smooth suture (12.0 vs 19.2 minutes; P <.001), primarily due to the need for fewer deep dermal sutures. The rapid-absorbing barbed suture showed a complication profile equivalent to the smooth suture, while the slow-absorbing barbed suture had a higher incidence of minor suture extrusion. Conclusions: Barbed sutures enabled faster dermal closure quicker than smooth sutures, with a comparable complication profile.",
    keywords = "abdominal wound closure, absorbable barbed sutures, absorbable smooth sutures, body contouring, mammaplasty, sutures, wound closure techniques",
    author = "Rubin, {J. Peter} and Hunstad, {Joseph P.} and Alain Polynice and Gusenoff, {Jeffrey A.} and Thomas Schoeller and Raymond Dunn and Walgenbach, {Klaus J.} and Juliana Hansen",
    year = "2014",
    month = "2",
    doi = "10.1177/1090820X13519264",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "34",
    pages = "272--283",
    journal = "Aesthetic Surgery Journal",
    issn = "1090-820X",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing absorbable barbed sutures versus conventional absorbable sutures for dermal closure in open surgical procedures

    AU - Rubin, J. Peter

    AU - Hunstad, Joseph P.

    AU - Polynice, Alain

    AU - Gusenoff, Jeffrey A.

    AU - Schoeller, Thomas

    AU - Dunn, Raymond

    AU - Walgenbach, Klaus J.

    AU - Hansen, Juliana

    PY - 2014/2

    Y1 - 2014/2

    N2 - Background: Barbed sutures were developed to reduce operative time and improve security of wound closure. Objective: The authors compare absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) with conventional (smooth) absorbable sutures for soft tissue approximation. Method: A prospective multicenter randomized study comparing barbed sutures with smooth sutures was undertaken between August 13, 2009, and January 31, 2010, in 241 patients undergoing abdominoplasty, mastopexy, and reduction mammaplasty. Each patient received barbed sutures on 1 side of the body, with deep dermal sutures eliminated or reduced. Smooth sutures with deep dermal and subcuticular closure were used on the other side as a control. The primary endpoint was dermal closure time. Safety was assessed through adverse event reporting through a 12-week follow-up. Results: A total of 229 patients were ultimately treated (115 with slow-absorbing polymer and 114 with rapid-absorbing polymer). Mean dermal closure time was significantly quicker with the barbed suture compared with the smooth suture (12.0 vs 19.2 minutes; P <.001), primarily due to the need for fewer deep dermal sutures. The rapid-absorbing barbed suture showed a complication profile equivalent to the smooth suture, while the slow-absorbing barbed suture had a higher incidence of minor suture extrusion. Conclusions: Barbed sutures enabled faster dermal closure quicker than smooth sutures, with a comparable complication profile.

    AB - Background: Barbed sutures were developed to reduce operative time and improve security of wound closure. Objective: The authors compare absorbable barbed sutures (V-Loc, Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) with conventional (smooth) absorbable sutures for soft tissue approximation. Method: A prospective multicenter randomized study comparing barbed sutures with smooth sutures was undertaken between August 13, 2009, and January 31, 2010, in 241 patients undergoing abdominoplasty, mastopexy, and reduction mammaplasty. Each patient received barbed sutures on 1 side of the body, with deep dermal sutures eliminated or reduced. Smooth sutures with deep dermal and subcuticular closure were used on the other side as a control. The primary endpoint was dermal closure time. Safety was assessed through adverse event reporting through a 12-week follow-up. Results: A total of 229 patients were ultimately treated (115 with slow-absorbing polymer and 114 with rapid-absorbing polymer). Mean dermal closure time was significantly quicker with the barbed suture compared with the smooth suture (12.0 vs 19.2 minutes; P <.001), primarily due to the need for fewer deep dermal sutures. The rapid-absorbing barbed suture showed a complication profile equivalent to the smooth suture, while the slow-absorbing barbed suture had a higher incidence of minor suture extrusion. Conclusions: Barbed sutures enabled faster dermal closure quicker than smooth sutures, with a comparable complication profile.

    KW - abdominal wound closure

    KW - absorbable barbed sutures

    KW - absorbable smooth sutures

    KW - body contouring

    KW - mammaplasty

    KW - sutures

    KW - wound closure techniques

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84893695950&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84893695950&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1177/1090820X13519264

    DO - 10.1177/1090820X13519264

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 24421408

    AN - SCOPUS:84893695950

    VL - 34

    SP - 272

    EP - 283

    JO - Aesthetic Surgery Journal

    JF - Aesthetic Surgery Journal

    SN - 1090-820X

    IS - 2

    ER -