Comparing Cosmetic Outcomes of Straight-Line Versus W-Plasty Techniques for Linear Postauricular Wound Closure: A Randomized Evaluator Blind Split-Scar Trial

Author:

Mehrzad Mehrnaz1,Kang Alison S.2,Armstrong April W.3,Eisen Daniel B.3

Affiliation:

1. School of Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California;

2. Department of Dermatology, Health Sciences Campus, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California;

3. Departments of Dermatology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California

Abstract

BACKGROUND Surgeons' opinions vary on the cosmetic outcome of straight-line (SL) versus broken-line (W-plasty) closure methods. To date, no studies have compared the 2 techniques in the split-scar design model that resolves the confounding individual patient factors that affects the scar outcome. OBJECTIVE Compare outcomes and wound cosmesis with SL versus W-plasty closure techniques. METHODS This clinical trial was conducted with 50 linear surgical wounds randomized to SL closure on half and W-plasty on the other half. At 3 months, patients and 2 masked observers evaluated each scar using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale [POSAS]). RESULTS The mean (SD) sum of the POSAS observer component scores were 16.6 (6.18) for the SL side and 15.5 (6.37) for the W-plasty side (p = .49). The mean (SD) sum of the POSAS patient scores were 14.4 (6.8) in SL and 15.1 (8.2) in W-plasty (p = .59). The mean (SD) complications were 0.08 (0.06) for SL and 0.02 (0.14) for W-plasty (p = .18). CONCLUSION No statistically significant difference in wound cosmesis or complications was noted between SL versus W-plasty closure techniques. Surgeons may want to consider whether the extra time involved in placing zigzag W-plasty lines is worthwhile.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Reference24 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3