Comparison of Rapid Absorbable Sutures with Nonabsorbable Sutures in Closing Transcolumellar Incision in...

Following open rhinoplasty, a postoperative scar at the columellar incision line is a common morbidity. The aim of this study is to compare absorbable and nonabsorbable suture materials which had been used for closing the transcolumellar incision, in the aspect of risk of postoperative infection, wound healing, postoperative columellar scar and patient satisfaction.

A prospective, randomized, single-blind study was conducted between May 2017 and February 2018. Sixty-four rhinoplasty patients were randomly assigned to absorbable (n = 32) or nonabsorbable (n = 32) groups. The columellar incision was closed with 7 full-thickness skin sutures. Either nonabsorbable 6/0 polypropylene (Group 1) or absorbable 6/0 polyglytone 6211 (Group 2) sutures were placed at the columellar incisions. Polypropylene sutures were removed at the 7th postoperative day. A Mann-Whitney U test and Monte Carlo were used for statistical comparison. Photographs of the patients at the postoperative third month (Fig. 2) were evaluated and scored in terms of scarring, pigmentation, notching, level differences in the incision area by two different otorhinolaryngologists who did not know the randomization. Suture removing discomfort was assessed with visual analogue scale scores. A satisfaction survey was filled out by all the patients completing their third month after the operation.

According to the results of both otorhinolaryngologists, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of pigmentation, level difference, notching, overall appearance and total score (p = 0.920, p = 0.498, respectively). The mean score on the Wong-Baker scale was 3.19 ± 1.67 in group 1. In the Satisfaction Survey, the average score of the group 1 was 6.90 ± 3.24, while the mean score of the group 2 was 7.062 ± 2.77. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.715).

Suturing inverted V transcolumellar incisions with rapid resorbable sutures caused significantly less discomfort but no difference in scarring compared to nonresorbable sutures as evaluated by patients and observers.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .