Comparing Subcuticular Sutures versus Percutaneous Staples for Skin Closure after Caesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Study

Main Article Content

L. C. Ikeako
E. I. Iloghalu
C. C. Dim
A. C. Adiuku-Brown
H. U. Ezegwui
C. K. Oranusi

Abstract

Background: Wound complications following caesarean delivery are significant causes of morbidity and financial strain especially in low resource countries. Use of appropriate technique in skin closure could reduce the emotional burden of an already difficult period of adjustment.

Objective: To compare the outcome of surgical metallic staples versus absorbable subcuticular suture for skin closure at caesarean delivery.

Methods: This was a randomised interventional study of pregnant woman booked for caesarean delivery in two hospitals in Enugu, south east Nigeria. Data was analysed using SPSS computer software version 20.0 for windows (Chicago IL, USA). Proportions were compared using Pearson’s Chi Square or Fisher’s test as appropriate. P value of ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Two hundred and twenty women booked for elective and emergency caesarean section were randomised into surgical metallic staples and absorbable subcuticular sutures groups. Outcome in the staples and sutures groups are; composite wound complications, (11.9%) vs (3.8%) p=0.041, mean operation time (minutes), (50.7±6.88) vs (69.5±5.71) p<0.001, mean post operation pain, (1.8±1.18) vs (1.1±0.99) p<0.001 and maternal satisfaction (8.05±0.54) vs (9.5±0.75) p=0.011.

Conclusion: Women in Enugu, Nigeria are more satisfied with subcuticular absorbable suture for skin closure following caesarean delivery.

Keywords:
Skin, metallic, staple, absorbable, subcuticular, caesarean section

Article Details

How to Cite
Ikeako, L. C., Iloghalu, E. I., Dim, C. C., Adiuku-Brown, A. C., Ezegwui, H. U., & Oranusi, C. K. (2016). Comparing Subcuticular Sutures versus Percutaneous Staples for Skin Closure after Caesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Study. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research, 18(4), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJMMR/2016/29450
Section
Original Research Article