English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the scar quality associated with different types of subcuticular suture techniques: running or interrupted. Summary of Background Data: Subcuticular suture is a preferred skin closure method even in gastrointestinal surgery. Two methods for subcuticular suture are used: running or interrupted sutures. Methods: Inclusion criteria were as follows: age ≥ 20 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists performance status 1 to 3; histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the stomach; no evidence of distant metastases or disease considered unresectable; no prior upper abdominal surgery; no uncontrolled infections, diabetes, or cardiac disease; and adequate renal function. Patients were randomly assigned to running subcuticular suture or interrupted subcuticular suture. Scar areas were calculated using a digital photograph calculator at about 7 months after surgery. The observer scar assessment scale (OSAS) was used for scar assessment. Results: Between April 10, 2009, and February 28, 2012, 220 patients were enrolled into this study and 201 patients were evaluated. There was no difference in scar area between the interrupted group and the running group [0.97 cm2 (95% CI: 0.73–1.21) in the interrupted group and 1.17 cm2 (95% CI: 0.91–1.42, P = 0.27) in the running group]. Three observers performed the OSAS, for which no significant difference was detected across the closure groups. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in cosmetic outcomes between running and interrupted subcuticular sutures. The final decision about the choice of method should be made balancing surgeon needs (time-saving with running) and surgeon techniques (running might be difficult).

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Running Versus Interrupted Subcuticular Sutures for Skin Closure in Open Gastric Surgery