References
- Breuninger H, Keilbach J, Haaf U. Intracutaneous butterfly suture with absorbable synthetic suture material. Technique, tissue reactions, and results. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1993;19:607–610.
- Regula CG, Yag-Howard C. Suture products and techniques: what to use, where, and why. Dermatol Surg. 2015;41 Suppl 10:S187–S200.
- Adams B, Anwar J, Wrone DA, et al. Techniques for cutaneous sutured closures: variants and indications. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2003;22:306–316.
- Breuninger H. Double butterfly suture for high tension: a broadly anchored, horizontal, buried interrupted suture. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26:215–218.
- Yag-Howard C. Novel surgical approach to subcutaneous closure: the subcutaneous inverted cross mattress stitch (SICM Stitch). Dermatol Surg. 2011;37:1503–1505.
- Stewart JB. Jr. Tissue sparing repair. A new approach to shorten excisional lines. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992;18:822–826.
- Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:726–732.
- Conn J, Jr., Oyasu R, Welsh M, et al. Vicryl (polyglactin 910) synthetic absorbable sutures. Am J Surg. 1974;128:19–23.
- Hollander JE, Singer AJ, Valentine S, et al. Wound registry: development and validation. Ann Emerg Med. 1995;25:675–685.
- Draaijers LJ, Tempelman FR, Botman YA, et al. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113:1960–1965. discussion 6-7.
- van de Kar AL, Corion LU, Smeulders MJ, et al. Reliable and feasible evaluation of linear scars by the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116:514–522.
- Walker E, Nowacki AS. Understanding equivalence and noninferiority testing. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26:192–196.
- Yaltirik M, Dedeoglu K, Bilgic B, et al. Comparison of four different suture materials in soft tissues of rats. Oral Dis. 2003;9:284–286.
- Bahar I, Weinberger D, Dan G, et al. Pterygium surgery: fibrin glue versus Vicryl sutures for conjunctival closure. Cornea. 2006;25:1168–1172.
- Paradis C. Bias in surgical research. Ann Surg. 2008;248:180–188.
- Israelsson LA. Bias in clinical trials: the importance of suture technique. Eur J Surg. 1999;165:3–7.
- Rubin JP, Hunstad JP, Polynice A, et al. A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing absorbable barbed sutures versus conventional absorbable sutures for dermal closure in open surgical procedures. Aesthet Surg J. 2014;34:272–283.
- de Blacam C, Colakoglu S, Momoh AO, et al. Early experience with barbed sutures for abdominal closure in deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction. Eplasty. 2012;12:231–236.
- Gililland JM, Anderson LA, Sun G, et al. Perioperative closure-related complication rates and cost analysis of barbed suture for closure in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:125–129.
- Hopper AN, Jamison MH, Lewis WG. Learning curves in surgical practice. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83:777–779.
- Korndorffer JR, Jr., Dunne JB, Sierra R, et al. Simulator training for laparoscopic suturing using performance goals translates to the operating room. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201:23–29.