OBJECTIVE: A prospective, randomized study was undertaken to compare a non-invasive surgical zipper to intracutaneous suture closure in open-heart surgery with respect to postoperative wound infection rate and cosmetic results. METHODS: A total number of 300 patients were included in the study, of which 150 had their skin wound closed with zipper and 150 with intracutaneous suture. The end-points were superficial and deep sternal wound infections within 6 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: The incidence of total infection after 6 weeks was equal in the two groups (6.7 vs. 6.7%) (P=0.94). The superficial infection rate was 5.3% in the zipper group vs. 6.0% in the intracutaneous, and the deep infection rate was 1.4% in the zipper group and 0.7% in the intracutaneous. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Only the cosmetic result differed. On a visual scale from 1 (poorest) to 10 (best), an average score of 8.2 was obtained in the intracutaneous group versus 8.9 in the zipper group (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The wound infection rate was equal for the intracutaneous group compared with the zipper group; however, the cosmetic result was judged better by the patients in the zipper group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ivar Risnes (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: