Results of a prospective randomised study comparing a non-invasive surgical zipper versus intracutaneous sutures for
W Roolker1, E Kraaneveld, H D Been
1Department of Orthopaedics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. wroolker@yahoo.com
Abstract:
A prospective randomised study was undertaken to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of a non-invasive surgical zipper (Medizip) vs intracutaneous sutures skin closure in orthopaedic surgery. The study group consisted of 120 consecutive patients, 45 men and 75 women with a mean age of 47 years. The Medizip was used in 20 surgical knee wounds, 20 hip wounds and 20 orthopaedic spine wounds. The same number of patients received intracutaneous sutures. Handling, wound healing and scar formation on day 1, at 2 weeks and 6 weeks were evaluated. The average time for wound closure with the zipper was 2 min and 9.4 min when the wound was closed with intracutaneous sutures (p = 0 .01). Patients were positive in their assessment of the wound healing progress and results; they found the skin closure device agreeable to wear. The scar result was rated very good in 82% (n = 4 9) of the zipper group, and 85% (n = 5 1) in the intracutaneous group (p = 0 .67). Based on the results obtained, the non-invasive skin closure system Medizip represents a safe option in the spectrum of surgical wound treatment.
