Catgut Versus Polypropylene Sutures for Transcolumellar Incision Closure in Open Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Saud Aldhabaan,Jibril Y Hudise,Mohammed Alqarny,Ahmed Alarfaj

doi:10.7759/cureus.9769

Abstract

BackgroundOpen rhinoplasty, including the transcolumellar approach, is commonly performed as it has fewer side effects and provides superior anatomical control to the surgeons compared to closed rhinoplasty. However, the postoperative scar outcomes, such as scar appearance, vary depending on the type of suture used in wound closure, and the optimal suture type is not firmly established.ObjectiveTo compare the impact of catgut versus polypropylene sutures on the postoperative transcolumellar scar outcomes and patient satisfaction following open rhinoplasty.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study, including 100 patients who underwent transcolumellar open rhinoplasty, was conducted at otolaryngology department of King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Riyadh, KSA. The patients were divided into two groups: the propylene suture group (group 1), which included 15 males and 35 females with a mean age of 31.5 years and underwent surgery using propylene sutures, and the catgut suture group (group 2), which included 10 males and 40 females with a mean age of 30.5 years and underwent surgery using catgut sutures. The postoperative transcolumellar scar outcomes, as determined by visual analogue scale (VAS) and Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) scores, and patient satisfaction, as assessed using a self-assessment scale, were compared between groups.ResultsThe scars were unnoticeable in the majority of both groups: 88% in group 1 and 86% in group 2. The VAS and SBSES scores did not significantly differ between groups. Patients' satisfaction rates were also comparable and did not significantly differ between groups (p = 0.341).ConclusionBoth catgut and polypropylene sutures lead to similar outcomes and patient satisfaction rates in terms of postoperative rhinoplasty transcolumellar scars. Thus, catgut may be the optimal suture for closing transcolumellar incisions following open rhinoplasty.

Highlights

Rhinoplasty is a common surgical intervention aiming to preserve the aesthetic and functional properties of the nose
Our current findings are consistent with the literature as we demonstrated that absorbable and non-absorbable sutures do not differ in terms of wound aesthetics and patient satisfaction scores
The results suggested that none of the suture materials hindered wound healing, and there was a low incidence of wound complications with all of the used suture materials that did not reach statistical significance [19]

Summary

Introduction

Rhinoplasty is a common surgical intervention aiming to preserve the aesthetic and functional properties of the nose. This surgery is applied to reconstruct the deformed nose resulting from traumatic injuries, maxillary surgeries, or birth defects [1,2,3]. The transcolumellar scar provides superior anatomical and surgical control and generally heals well without complications using non-absorbable monofilament sutures, such as polypropylene [5]. Monofilament suture that consists of organic material derived from animal intestines, and can elicit an allergic reaction and affect wound healing [9]. Open rhinoplasty, including the transcolumellar approach, is commonly performed as it has fewer side effects and provides superior anatomical control to the surgeons compared to closed rhinoplasty. The postoperative scar outcomes, such as scar appearance, vary depending on the type of suture used in wound closure, and the optimal suture type is not firmly established

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion