Comparison of Wound Outcomes for Absorbable versus Non-absorbable Suture after Carpal Tunnel Release
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18060/27858Abstract
Background and Hypothesis:
Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is a common hand surgery procedure. Despite the large volume of CTRs performed worldwide (400,000-600,000 cases/year), there is no consensus as to the optimal suture material for incision closure. In this study, we sought to compare outcomes of absorbable and non-absorbable suture for skin closure after CTR. Our hypothesis was that that there is no statistically or clinically significant difference in wound-related outcomes between the cohorts.
Project Methods:
All patients who underwent primary open carpal tunnel release (CTR) at a large, public county hospital in Indianapolis, IN were identified by CPT code (64721). All patients were treated by one of two fellowship-trained hand surgeons. The most recent 50 patients treated between September 2022 and May 2023 by each surgeon were identified. Surgeon “A” uses 4-0 vicryl rapide for closures (absorbable). Surgeon “B” uses 4-0 nylon for closures (non-absorbable). Adverse events (AE) were defined as infection, dehiscence, or suture granuloma observed at any follow-up appointment. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board.
Results:
100 patients were identified - 4 patients were lost to follow-up and were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 96 patients, 46 received absorbable suture and 50 non-absorbable suture. Of the 46 patients who received absorbable suture, 8 experienced AE (17.4%). None of the 50 patients who received non-absorbable suture experienced an AE. There was a statistically significant difference in AE between the absorbable and non-absorbable suture cohorts (p=0.002). Patients with absorbable suture averaged 1.61 follow-up appointments, whereas those with non-absorbable suture averaged 2.32 (p=.0008).
Conclusion and Potential Impact:
In this study, absorbable suture resulted in more wound-related complications after CTR. However, patients with non-absorbable suture had more post-operative follow-up appointments. These findings should be considered when selecting suture material for skin closure after CTR.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Cameron Harmon, Jeffrey N. Gross, MD, Joshua M. Adkinson, MD, Brian Christie, MD
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.