Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Rapid Absorbable Sutures with Nonabsorbable Sutures in Closing Transcolumellar Incision in Septorhinoplasty: Short-term Outcomes

  • Original Article
  • Rhinoplasty
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Following open rhinoplasty, a postoperative scar at the columellar incision line is a common morbidity. The aim of this study is to compare absorbable and nonabsorbable suture materials which had been used for closing the transcolumellar incision, in the aspect of risk of postoperative infection, wound healing, postoperative columellar scar and patient satisfaction.

Method

A prospective, randomized, single-blind study was conducted between May 2017 and February 2018. Sixty-four rhinoplasty patients were randomly assigned to absorbable (n = 32) or nonabsorbable (n = 32) groups. The columellar incision was closed with 7 full-thickness skin sutures. Either nonabsorbable 6/0 polypropylene (Group 1) or absorbable 6/0 polyglytone 6211 (Group 2) sutures were placed at the columellar incisions. Polypropylene sutures were removed at the 7th postoperative day. A Mann–Whitney U test and Monte Carlo were used for statistical comparison. Photographs of the patients at the postoperative third month (Fig. 2) were evaluated and scored in terms of scarring, pigmentation, notching, level differences in the incision area by two different otorhinolaryngologists who did not know the randomization. Suture removing discomfort was assessed with visual analogue scale scores. A satisfaction survey was filled out by all the patients completing their third month after the operation.

Results

According to the results of both otorhinolaryngologists, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pigmentation, level difference, notching, overall appearance and total score (p = 0.920, p = 0.498, respectively). The mean score on the Wong–Baker scale was 3.19 ± 1.67 in group 1. In the Satisfaction Survey, the average score of the group 1 was 6.90 ± 3.24, while the mean score of the group 2 was 7.062 ± 2.77. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.715).

Conclusions

Suturing inverted V transcolumellar incisions with rapid resorbable sutures caused significantly less discomfort but no difference in scarring compared to nonresorbable sutures as evaluated by patients and observers.

Level of Evidence III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sheen JH (1997) Closed versus open rhinoplasty–and the debate goes on. Plast Reconstr Surg 99(3):859–862

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gunter JP (1997) The merits of the open approach in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 99(3):863–867

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Toriumi DM, Johnson CMJ (1993) Open structure rhinoplasty: featured technical points and long-term follow-up. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 1:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  4. Celik M, Tuncer S, Eryilmaz E (2003) Running W incision in open rhinoplasty: better scar quality. Aesthet Plast Surg 27(5):388–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Inanli S, Sari M, Yanik M (2009) A new consideration of scar formation in open rhinoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 20(4):1228–1230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Alinasab B, Haraldsson PO (2016) Rapid resorbable sutures are a favourable alternative to non-resorbable sutures in closing transcolumellar incision in rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 40(4):449–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sajid MS, McFall MR, Whitehouse PA, Sains PS (2014) Systematic review of absorbable vs nonabsorble sutures used for the closure of surgical incisions. World J Gastrointest Surg 6(12):241–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Karounis H, Gouin S, Eisman H, Chalut D, Pelletier H, Williams B (2004) A randomized controlled trial comparing long-term cosmetic outcomes of traumatic pediatric lacerations repaired with absorbable plain catgut versus nonabsobable nylon suture. Acad Emerg Med 11(7):730–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Guyuron B, Vaughan C (1999) A comparison of absorbable and nonabsorbable suture materials for skin repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 56:372–377

    Google Scholar 

  10. Yagmur C, Ak S, Engin MS, Evin N, Kelahmetoglu O, Akbas H, Demir A (2017) Columelar scar perception in open rhinoplasty. Interplay of scar awareness, body cathexis an patient satisfaction. Aesthet Plast Surg 41(1):153–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Breed CM, Biezen JJ, Marck KW (1999) Slowly and rapidly absorbable sutures and their influence on scar width. Eur J Plast Surg 22:251–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bafaqeeh SA, Al-Qattan MM (1998) Open rhinoplasty: columellar scar analysis in an Arabian population. Plastic Reconst Surg 102:1226–1228

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Foda HM (2004) External rhinoplasty for the Arabian nose: a columellar scar analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 28(5):312–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ihvan O, Seneldir L, Naiboglu B, Verim A, Cetiner S (2018) Comparative columellar scar analysis between W incisions and inverted-V incision in OpenTechnique Nasal Surgery. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 70(2):231–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Aksu I, Alim H, Tellioğlu AT (2008) Comparative columellar scar analysis between transverse and inverted-V incision in open rhinoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 32(4):638–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Verim A, Duymus R, Calim OF, Karaca CT, Ozkul MH, Yasar H, Bahadir E, Bakal N (2013) Effect of nose skin on the columellar incision scar in a Turkish population. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 149(3):438–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kilavuz AE, Bayram AA, Serin GM (2017) Comparison of absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures in columellar incision closure in rhinoplasty and their effects to postoperative scar. Facial Plast Surg 33(6):661–664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Parell GJ, Becker GD (2003) Comparison of absorbable with nonabsorbable sutures in closure of facial skin wounds. Arch Facial Plast Surg 5(6):488–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Erel E, Pleasance PI, Ahmed O, Hart NB (2001) Absorbable versus non-absorbable suture in carpal tunnel decompression. J Hand Surg 26(2):157–158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Menovsky T, Bartels RH, Van Lindert EL, Grotenhuis JA (2004) Skin closure in carpal tunnel surgery: a prospective comparative study between nylon, polyglactin 910 and stainless steel sutures. Hand Surg 9(1):35–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hansen TB, Kirkeby L, Fisker H, Larsen K (2009) Randomised controlled study of two different techniques of skin suture in endoscopic release of carpal tunnel. Scand J Plast Reconstruct Surg Hand Surg 43(6):335–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Chung E, McPherson N, Grant A (2009) Tensile strength of absorbable suture materials: in vitro analysis of the effects of pH and bacteria. J Surg Educ 66(4):208–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Van Heerden J (2005) Comparison of inflammatory response to polyglytone 6211 and polyglecaprone 25 in a rat model. S Afr Med J 95(12):972–974

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Elmadag Hulusi Alatas State Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Ozan Erol

  2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Baskent University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Fuat Buyuklu, Alper Koycu, Sabuhi Jafarov, Goknil Gultekin & Selim S. Erbek

Authors
  1. Ozan Erol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fuat Buyuklu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alper Koycu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sabuhi Jafarov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Goknil Gultekin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Selim S. Erbek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ozan Erol.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have a financial interest in any of the products, devices or drugs mentioned in this manuscript. Also none of the authors have a conflict of interest and disclosures.

Ethical Approval

The study protocol was approved by the Baskent University Medical and Health Sciences Research Council and Ethics Committee (Project No: KA18/184) and was supported by the Research Fund of Baskent University.

Informed Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Erol, O., Buyuklu, F., Koycu, A. et al. Comparison of Rapid Absorbable Sutures with Nonabsorbable Sutures in Closing Transcolumellar Incision in Septorhinoplasty: Short-term Outcomes. Aesth Plast Surg 44, 1759–1765 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01864-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01864-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation