Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Comparison of Polydioxanone and Polypropylene Sutures in Columellar Incision Closure: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColumellar scarring remains an important aesthetic concern in open septorhinoplasty, and while multiple studies have compared absorbable and non-absorbable sutures, the specific effects of slowly absorbable polydioxanone (PDS) on long-term scar outcomes have not been previously investigated. MATERIALS AND
methodsNinety-six patients undergoing primary septorhinoplasty between January 2023 and January 2024 were randomly assigned to the PDS (n = 47) or Prolene (n = 49) groups. Patients with prior nasal surgery or systemic connective tissue disorders were excluded. Scar appearance was evaluated one year postoperatively using the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) and a 0-100 visual analog scale (VAS) rated by both patients and a blinded otolaryngologist.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences in patient VAS scores (P = 0.326), physician VAS scores (P = 0.055), or SBSES scores (P = 0.41) between the groups. Confidence-interval-based non-inferiority analyses supported non-inferiority for physician-rated VAS, whereas patient-rated VAS and SB total were close to the prespecified margins.
conclusionPDS sutures yield comparable aesthetic outcomes to Prolene and offer the additional benefits of absorbability and sustained tensile strength. They may be preferable in cases where long-term support is needed or where suture removal may cause discomfort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: 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 .
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.