Comparative study between coaptive film versus suture for wound closure after long bone fracture fixation.

Autor:	Anuar Ramdhan I; Department of Orthopaedics, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Malaysia., Zulmi W; Department of Orthopaedics, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Malaysia., Hidayah A; Department of Orthopaedics, Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II, Kota Bharu, Malaysia., Kamel M; Department of Orthopaedics, Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II, Kota Bharu, Malaysia., Fadhil M; Department of Orthopaedics, Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II, Kota Bharu, Malaysia., Anwar Hau M; Department of Orthopaedics, Hospital Raja Perempuan Zainab II, Kota Bharu, Malaysia.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Malaysian orthopaedic journal [Malays Orthop J] 2013 Mar; Vol. 7 (1), pp. 52-5.
DOI:	10.5704/MOJ.1303.017
Abstrakt:	Background: Coaptive film (i.e., Steri-Strips™) is an adhesive tape used to replace sutures in wound closure. The use of coaptive film for wound closure after long bone fracture fixation has not been well documented in the literature. Methods: The aim of this prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing coaptive film with sutures for wound closure after long bone fracture fixation was skin closure time, incidence of wound complications and scar width at 12 week follow-up. Forty-five patients underwent femur fracture fixation (22 patients' wound closed with sutures, 23 with coaptive film). Results: The mean time for skin closure using coaptive film was 171.13 seconds compared to 437.27 seconds using suture. The mean wound lengths in the coaptive film group and suture group were 187.65 mm and 196.73 mm, respectively. One patient in each group had wound complications. Conclusion: Coaptive film is a time-saving procedure for skin closure following long bone fracture fixation. There is no difference in the incidence of wound complications and scar width between these two methods of skin closure.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu