Trial reportAcademic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine2004
A randomized, controlled trial comparing long-term cosmetic outcomes of traumatic pediatric lacerations repaired with absorbable plain gut versus nonabsorbable nylon sutures.
Trial report in Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04056013 (Vicryl Rapide Versus Nonabsorbable Suture in Repair of Simple Traumatic Extremity and Trunk Lacerations in Adult Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Vicryl Rapide Versus Nonabsorbable Suture in Repair of Simple Traumatic Extremity and Trunk Lacerations in Adult Patients
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuous versus interrupted skin sutures for non-obstetric surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Management of Pediatric Hand Injuries in the Acute Setting Part 3: Lacerations and Fingertip Injuries.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Review
- Effects of aesthetic suturing on wound healing and scar formation in patients with traffic accident-related injuries.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Vicryl Rapide or Prolene for Skin Closure of Cleft Lip Patients: A Prospective Study.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2025Article
- A comparative study of suture versus sutureless circumcision: Evaluating cosmetic outcomes, wound dehiscence and infection rates.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Absorbable versus Nonabsorbable Sutures for Facial Skin Closure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Clinical and Aesthetic Outcomes.Archives of plastic surgery · 2024Article
- The effect of different suturing materials for abdominal fascia wound closure on the collagen I/III expression ratio in rats.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Managing pain and distress in children undergoing brief diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.Paediatrics & child health · 2019Review
- A comparative study of immediate wound healing complications following cleft lip repair using either absorbable or non-absorbable skin sutures.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2018Article
- Cutaneous wound closure materials: an overview and update.Journal of cutaneous and aesthetic surgery · 2013Review
- Users' Guide to the Surgical Literature. Understanding confidence intervals.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2012Article
- Comparison of Metallic Foreign-Body Removal between Dynamic Ultrasound and Static Radiography in a Pigs' Feet Model.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2011Article
- Novel devices for wound closure in interventional radiology.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2008Article
- Best evidence topic report. Absorbable sutures in paediatric lacerations.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2006Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo show that the use of absorbable sutures in pediatric traumatic lacerations affords good long-term cosmesis and no increase in complications (infection, dehiscence rates, and need for surgical scar revision) when compared with wounds sutured with nonabsorbable sutures.
methodsThis was a randomized clinical trial conducted in a pediatric emergency department. Patients 1-18 years of age who presented to the emergency department with lacerations < 12 hours old were recruited between January 1999 and December 2001. Exclusion criteria were the following: wounds that could be approximated by tissue adhesives, animal/human bites, gross contamination, puncture/crush wounds, wounds crossing joints, lacerations of tendon/nerve/cartilage, collagen vascular disease, immunodeficiency, diabetes mellitus, bleeding disorder, and scalp lacerations. Patients were randomized into one of two groups: those receiving absorbable plain gut sutures (group A) and those receiving nonabsorbable nylon sutures (group NA). Board-eligible/certified pediatric emergency physicians or clinical fellows performed laceration repair in a standardized approach. All wounds were reevaluated within ten days by a single research nurse who assessed the wounds using a previously validated wound evaluation score (WES) composed of six items (presence of step-off, contour irregularities, margin separation, edge inversion, extensive distortion, and overall cosmetic appearance). A score of 6/6 was considered optimal. The study nurse also noted the presence of infection and dehiscence. The patients were then seen by a single blinded plastic surgeon at four or five months who evaluated the wound using a previously validated visual analog scale of cosmesis (VAS). In addition, the surgeon repeated the WES and assessed the need for surgical scar revision.
resultsA total of 147 patients were eligible, and 52 patients declined to participate. Of the 95 patients enrolled, 50 were randomized to group A and 45 to group NA. The two groups had similar ages, gender distributions, rates of use of sedation or steri-strips, wound lengths and widths, mechanisms of injury, and wound locations. At the short-term follow-up, no difference was found in the proportion of optimal WES scores between group A (63% of patients) and group NA (49% of patients) (relative risk = 0.73; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 0.45 to 1.17). No difference was found in the rates of infection and dehiscence between the two groups. Sixty-three of the 95 patients presented for long-term follow-up. The groups remained similar with respect to patient and wound characteristics as well as wound location. The average VAS score at four months was 79 (95% CI = 73 to 85) for group A and 66 (95% CI = 55 to 76) for group NA. In addition, no differences were found in the proportion of optimal WES between group A (36% of patients) and group NA (28% of patients) at four months (relative risk = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.62 to 1.26). Surgical scar revision was recommended for only three patients, of whom two were in group A. No patients chose to have their scars revised. No differences were found between group A and group NA for the rates of dehiscence (2% vs. 11%; p = 0.07) and infection (0 vs. 2; p = 0.3).
conclusionsThe use of plain catgut absorbable sutures in the repair of traumatic lacerations in children appears to be an acceptable alternative to nonabsorbable sutures because the long-term cosmetic outcome seems to be at least as good. In this study, plain gut suture material seemed to provide slightly better cosmesis. In addition, no difference was found in the rate of dehiscence or infection between the groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.