Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31724097›Full record

Trial reportArchives of dermatological research2020

5-0 Polypropylene versus 5-0 fast absorbing plain gut for cutaneous wound closure: a randomized evaluator blind trial.

Daniel Brian Eisen, Anne Rang Zhuang, Aliza Hasan, Victoria Rose Sharon, Heejung Bang, Milene Kennedy Crispin

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of dermatological research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05267002 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

One Week Versus Two Week Removal of Nylon Cutaneous Sutures for Linear Layered Closures on the Face: a Randomized Evaluator-blinded Prospective Split-scar Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorDermSurgery AssociatesRan2022 to 2023Enrolled68ConditionsSuture, Complications, Mechanical, Scar, SurgeryArmsSuture removal timing
NCT05408117 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Suture Type on Pigment Disturbances in Patients of Skin of Color: A Prospective, Randomized Split-wound Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMelissa Pugliano-MauroRan2022 to 2027Enrolled34ConditionsScarArms5-0 Polypropylene epidermal suture, 5-0 Fast gut epidermal suture
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniel Brian EisenDepartment of Dermatology, University of California Davis Medical Center, 3301 C St., Suite 1400, Sacramento, CA, 95816, USA. deisen123@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6741-3182
Anne Rang ZhuangLaser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, 3835 J St, Sacramento, CA, 95816, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8906-7046
Aliza HasanDepartment of Dermatology, University of California Davis Medical Center, 3301 C St., Suite 1400, Sacramento, CA, 95816, USA.
Victoria Rose SharonDepartment of Dermatology, Zucker School of Medicine At Hofstra/Northwell, 1991 Marcus Ave, Suite 300, New Hyde Park, NY, 11040, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5108-8757
Heejung BangDivision of Biostatistics, University of California, Davis, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5755-9951
Milene Kennedy CrispinCalifornia Skin Institute, 9781 Blue Larkspur Ln, Monterey, CA, 93940, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1507-3160

Funding

UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001860 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KENYON, NICHOLAS J., LYLES, COURTNEY REES · 2016 to 2025
$47.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001860
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mixed opinions exist regarding cosmetic outcomes of 5-0 fast absorbing plain (FG) gut relative to nonabsorbable suture material, such as 5-0 polypropylene (PP). High quality randomized trials comparing these two suture materials are lacking. To determine whether the use of PP during layered repair of linear cutaneous surgery wounds improves scar cosmesis compared to wound closure with FG. A randomized, split wound, comparative effectiveness trial was undertaken. Patients were evaluated 3 months after the intervention by two blinded physicians using the validated patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Patient assessments were also captured using the same instrument as well as scar width and complications. The mean sum of the six components of the POSAS was 10.26 vs 12.74 for PP and FG, respectively, significantly (p < 0.001) in favor of PP. Mean observer overall opinion similarly showed better outcomes for PP than for FG [1.88 vs 2.52, respectively (p < 0.006)]. The mean sum of the patient assessed components of the POSAS for PP and FG was 12.3 vs 14.34, respectively (p = 0.11). Patient overall opinion significantly favored PP (2.41 vs 3.14, p = 0.043). PP resulted in small but statistically significant better cosmetic outcomes than FG. Pain experienced during suture removal was minimal for most patients.

Indexed as

Dermatologic Surgical ProceduresSuturesSuture TechniquesAbsorbable ImplantsAgedAnimalsCicatrixFemaleHumansMalePolypropylenesPostoperative ComplicationsSkinWound HealingPolypropylenesCosmetic outcomeFast absorbing gutPolypropyleneSuture material

Identifiers

PMID31724097
PMCPMC7192227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.