Skin closure after total hip replacement a randomised controlled trial of skin adhesive versus surgical staples

C Livesey, V Wylde, S Descamps, CM Estela, GC Bannister, AW Blom

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

50 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We undertook a randomised controlled trial to compare the outcomes of skin adhesive and staples for skin closure in total hip replacement. The primary outcome was the cosmetic appearance of the scar at three months using a surgeon-rated visual analogue scale. In all, 90 patients were randomised to skin closure using either skin adhesive (n = 45) or staples (n = 45). Data on demographics, surgical details, infection and oozing were collected during the in-patient stay. Further data on complications, patient satisfaction and evaluation of cosmesis were collected at three-month follow-up, and a photograph of the scar was taken. An orthopaedic and a plastic surgeon independently evaluated the cosmetic appearance of the scars from the photographs. No significant difference was found between groups in the cosmetic appearance of scars at three months (p = 0.172), the occurrence of complications (p = 0.3), or patient satisfaction (p = 0.42). Staples were quicker and easier to use than skin adhesive and also less expensive. Skin adhesive and surgical staples are both effective skin closure methods in total hip replacement.
Translated title of the contributionSkin closure after total hip replacement a randomised controlled trial of skin adhesive versus surgical staples
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)725 - 729
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume91-B(6)
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2009

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Skin closure after total hip replacement a randomised controlled trial of skin adhesive versus surgical staples'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this