A randomised controlled trial of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for skin closure after open carpal tunnel release.

Abstract

We compared the aesthetic outcome of scars after closure of open carpal tunnel incisions with either absorbable 4-0 Vicryl Rapide or non-absorbable 4-0 Novafil. Patients were recruited in a randomized controlled trial and scars were scored at 6 weeks using a modified Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Scores demonstrated differences only for pain, vascularity and cross-hatching between both groups, though none of these were statistically significant. The dissolving and falling out of Vicryl Rapide was significantly more comfortable than removal of 4-0 Novafil sutures, assessed on a numerical analogue scale. There was no difference in infection rate between both study groups, supporting overall the use of Vicryl Rapide for the closure of palmar hand incisions, in light of the convenience and cost savings associated with absorbable sutures.