Octyl 2-cyanoacrylate versus conventional suturing of port site skin closure in laparoscopic appendicectomy: a prospective study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20210972Keywords:
Laproscopic appendicectomy, Octyl-2-cyanoacrylate, Nylon non absorbable sutureAbstract
Background: With rapidly developing minimally invasive surgery, the laparoscopic appendectomy has become a preferred method for appendicectomy. Tissue adhesives have become an ideal alternative to conventional sutures and could possibly become the preferred standard of care in many procedures. However, this concept remains unexplored due to scanty data comparing the use of adhesive glues and sutures. The present prospective study was done to compare octyl-2-cyanoacrylate with conventional suturing of port site wound closure in laparoscopic appendicectomy in terms of wound complications, time taken for wound closure and cosmetic outcome.
Methods: 60 patients diagnosed to have appendicitis (acute, chronic and recurrent) undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy were divided into two groups (group A-octyl-2-cyanoacrylate) and (group B- conventional sutures) with 30 in each group. Time taken for wound closure, Wound complications and cosmetic outcome were compared in both groups.
Results: Patient demographics were comparable in both the groups. The complications were significantly lower in group A compared to group B. Mean surgical time for wound closure in group A was less compared to group B (p<0.001). Wound closure using octyl-2-cyanoacrylate had lower rate of complications compared to conventional suturing but results obtained were not statistically significant. No significant difference in cosmetic outcome was noted in both groups.
Conclusions: Wound closure using octyl-2-cyanoacrylate required significantly less time for skin closure compared to conventional suturing in patients undergoing laparoscopic appendicectomy. However, wound complications and cosmetic outcome using octyl-2-cyanoacrylate did not show statistically significant results compared to conventional suture.
Metrics
References
Sauerland S, Jaschinski T, Neugebauer EA. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(10):CD001546.
Cai YL, Xiong XE, Wu SJ, Cheng Y, Lu J, Zhang J et al. Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19(31):5165-73.
Chen K, Klapper AS, Voige H, Del Priore G. A randomized, controlled study comparing two standardized closure methods of laparoscopic port sites. JSLS. 2010;14(3):391-4.
Hollander JE, Singer AJ, Valentine S, Henry MC. Wound Registry: Development and Validation. Ann Emerg Med. 1995;25(5):675-84.
Quinn J, Wells G, Sutcliffe T, Jarmuske M, Maw J, Stiell I et al, A randomized trial comparing octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and sutures in the management of lacerations. JAMA. 1997;277:1527-30.
Matin SF. Prospective Randomized Trial of Skin Adhesive versus Sutures for closure of 217 laparoscopic port-site incisions. J Am Coll Surgeons. 2003:196(6):845-53.
Toriumi DM, O’Grady K, Desai D, Bagal A. Use of Octyl-2-Cyanoacrylate for skin closure in facial plastic surgery. Plastic Reconstructive Surg. 1998:102(6):2209-19.
Bruns TB, Simon H, Mclario D. Laceration repair using a tissue adhesive in the children emergency Department. Paediatrics. 1996;98;673-75.
Quinn J, Wells G, Sutcliffe T, Jarmuske M, Maw J, Stiell I et al, A randomized trial comparing octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and sutures in the management of lacerations. JAMA. 1997;277:1527-30.
Jallali N, Haji A, Watson CJ. A prospective randomized trial comparing 2-octyl cyanoacrylate to conventional suturing in closure of laparoscopic cholecystectomy incisions. J Laparoendoscopic Adv Surg Tech Part A. 2004:14(4):209-11.
Quinn J, Wells G, Sutcliffe T, Jarmuske M, Maw J, Stiell I et al. Tissue adhesive versus suture wound repair at 1 year: randomized clinical trial correlating early, 3-month, and 1-year cosmetic outcome. Ann Emergency Med. 1998:32(6):645-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
