A review of sutures and other skin closure materials

References

• Singer AJ, Thode HC Jr, Hollander JE. National trends in ED lacerations between 1992 and 2002. Am J Emerg Med. 2006;24:183–188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer AJ, Hollander JE, Quinn JV. Evaluation and management of traumatic lacerations. N Engl J Med. 1997;337: 1142–1148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochberg J, Meyer KM, Marion MD. Suture choice and other methods of skin closure. Surg Clin North Am. 2009; 89:627–641.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett RG. Selection of wound closure materials. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1988;18:619–637.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann JB. Tensile strength and knot security of surgical suture materials. Am Surg. 1971;37:209–217.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gabrielli F, Potenza C, Puddu P, Sera F, Masini C, Abeni D. Suture materials and other factors associated with tissue reactivity, infection, and wound dehiscence among plastic surgery outpatients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;107:38–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moy RL, Waldman B, Hein DW. A review of sutures and suturing techniques. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992;18: 785–795.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Postlethwait RW. Long-term comparative study of nonabsorbable sutures. Ann Surg. 1970;171:892–898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann JB, Kelly RJ, Higgins GA. Polyglycolic acid sutures. Laboratory and clinical evaluation of a new absorbable suture material. Arch Surg. 1970;100:486–490.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osterberg B. Enclosure of bacteria within capillary multifilament sutures as protection against leukocytes. Acta Chir Scand. 1983;149:663–668.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ammirati CT. Advances in wound closure materials. Adv Dermatol. 2002;18:313–338.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pearl ML, Rayburn WF. Choosing abdominal incision and closure techniques: A review. J Reprod Med. 2004;49: 662–670.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Outlaw KK, Vela AR, O'Leary JP. Breaking strength and diameter of absorbable sutures after in vivo exposure in the rat. Am Surg. 1998;64:348–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig PH, Williams JA, Davis KW, Magoun AD, Levy AJ, Bogdansky S, . A biologic comparison of polyglactin 910 and polyglycolic acid synthetic absorbable sutures. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1975;141:1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Postlethwait RW. Polyglycolic acid surgical suture. Arch Surg. 1970;101:489–494.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Conn J Jr, Oyasu R, Welsh M, Beal JM. Vicryl (polyglactin 910) synthetic absorbable sutures. Am J Surg. 1974;128:19–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford HR, Jones P, Gaines B, Reblock K, Simpkins DL. Intraoperative handling and wound healing: Controlled clinical trial comparing coated VICRYL plus antibacterial suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan) with coated VICRYL suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture). Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2005;6:313–321.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ray JA, Doddi N, Regula D, Williams JA, Melveger A. Polydioxanone (PDS), a novel monofilament synthetic absorbable suture. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1981;153:497–507.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Katz AR, Mukherjee DP, Kaganov AL, Gordon S. A new synthetic monofilament absorbable suture made from polytrimethylene carbonate. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1985;161: 213–222.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rodeheaver GT, Powell TA, Thacker JG, Edlich RF. Mechanical performance of monofilament synthetic absorbable sutures. Am J Surg. 1987;154:544–547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villa MT, White LE, Alam M, Yoo SS, Walton RL. Barbed sutures: A review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 121:102e–108e.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postlethwait RW, Willigan DA, Ulin AW. Human tissue reaction to sutures. Ann Surg. 1975;181:144–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloom BS, Goldberg DJ. Suture material in cosmetic cutaneous surgery. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2007;9:41–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shapiro AJ, Dinsmore RC, North JH Jr. Tensile strength of wound closure with cyanoacrylate glue. Am Surg. 2001;67: 1113–1115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer AJ, Quinn JV, Hollander JE. The cyanoacrylate topical skin adhesives. Am J Emerg Med. 2008;26:490–496.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozkurt MK, Saydam L. The use of cyanoacrylates for wound closure in head and neck surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2008;265:331–335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer AJ, Quinn JV, Clark RE, Hollander JE. Closure of lacerations and incisions with octylcyanoacrylate: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Surgery. 2002;131: 270–276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinley SH, Yen MT. Octyl-2-cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive in external dacryocystorhinostomy. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;21:197–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Ende ED, Vriens PW, Allema JH, Breslau PJ. Adhesive bonds or percutaneous absorbable suture for closure of surgical wounds in children. Results of a prospective randomized trial. J Pediatr Surg. 2004;39:1249–1251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osmond MH, Quinn JV, Sutcliffe T, Jarmuske M, Klassen TP. A randomized, clinical trial comparing butylcyanoacrylate with octylcyanoacrylate in the management of selected pediatric facial lacerations. Acad Emerg Med. 1999;6:171–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattick A, Clegg G, Beattie T, Ahmad T. A randomised, controlled trial comparing a tissue adhesive (2-octylcyanoacrylate) with adhesive strips (Steristrips) for paediatric laceration repair. Emerg Med J. 2002;19:405–407.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerrigan CL, Homa K. Evaluation of a new wound closure device for linear surgical incisions: 3M Steri-Strip S Surgical Skin Closure versus subcuticular closure. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:186–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fick JL, Novo RE, Kirchhof N. Comparison of gross and histologic tissue responses of skin incisions closed by use of absorbable subcuticular staples, cutaneous metal staples, and polyglactin 910 suture in pigs. Am J Vet Res. 2005;66: 1975–1984.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineros-Fernandez A, Salopek LS, Rodeheaver PF, Drake DB, Edlich RF, Rodeheaver GT. A revolutionary advance in skin closure compared to current methods. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2006;16:19–27.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cross KJ, Teo EH, Wong SL, Lambe JS, Rohde CH, Grant RT, . The absorbable dermal staple device: A faster, more cost-effective method for incisional closure. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:156–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dresner HS, Hilger PA. Comparison of incision closures with subcuticular and percutaneous staples. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2009;11:320–326.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar