Injury · 2024
Comparison of head & facial skin wound healing complications with GLUBRAN® Tiss 2 skin adhesive Vs Non-absorbable nylon suture.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hamian Roumiani Pouneh, Shams Vahdati Samad, Ala Alireza
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Wound healing is an essential process for the body to repair damaged tissue and restore normal function. Over the years, there have been advancements in wound closure techniques, with skin adhesive and sutures being two common methods. In this article, we will evaluate the healing complications associated with GLUBRAN® Tiss 2 (2-cyanoacrylate) skin adhesive in comparison to traditional sutures.
METHOD: The study was a randomized control trial. In the control group, sutures were used with six zero nylon threads. In the intervention group, GLUBRAN® Tiss 2 skin adhesive was applied using a special applicator. Both groups underwent the same wound preparation and cleansing procedure. Patient data including demographics, wound location, and size were recorded. After closing the wound, patients were followed up after 1 month.
RESULTS: Overall, the study found that while there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender distribution, laceration location, or length,(p-value= 0.946, 0.812, 0.721 and 0.539 respectively) there were significant differences in terms of complications, scarring, and pain scores (p-value= 0.072, <0.001 and <0.001 respectively).
CONCLUSION: The use of GLUBRAN® Tiss 2 skin adhesive in patients with head or face lacerations may provide a less painful and complication-free alternative to traditional wound healing with sutures.
METHOD: The study was a randomized control trial. In the control group, sutures were used with six zero nylon threads. In the intervention group, GLUBRAN® Tiss 2 skin adhesive was applied using a special applicator. Both groups underwent the same wound preparation and cleansing procedure. Patient data including demographics, wound location, and size were recorded. After closing the wound, patients were followed up after 1 month.
RESULTS: Overall, the study found that while there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender distribution, laceration location, or length,(p-value= 0.946, 0.812, 0.721 and 0.539 respectively) there were significant differences in terms of complications, scarring, and pain scores (p-value= 0.072, <0.001 and <0.001 respectively).
CONCLUSION: The use of GLUBRAN® Tiss 2 skin adhesive in patients with head or face lacerations may provide a less painful and complication-free alternative to traditional wound healing with sutures.