A Prospective Controlled Study on Long-Term Outcomes of Facial Lacerations in Children

Sonja Fontana, Clemens M Schiestl, Markus A Landolt, Georg Staubli, Sara von Salis, Kathrin Neuhaus, Christoph Mohr, Julia Elrod, Sonja Fontana, Clemens M Schiestl, Markus A Landolt, Georg Staubli, Sara von Salis, Kathrin Neuhaus, Christoph Mohr, Julia Elrod

Abstract

Background: Although skin adhesives have been used for decades to treat skin lacerations, uncertainty remains about long-term results, and complications. Methods: In this prospective, controlled, single-blinded, observational cohort study, outcomes were assessed by five plastic surgeons with standardized photographs at 6-12 months using a modified Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS); additionally, the POSAS was performed by the patients/caregivers and the physician; pain, requirement of anesthesia, treatment time, costs, complications, and quality of live (QoL) were assessed. Results: A total of 367 patients were enrolled; 230 were included in the main analysis; 96 wounds were closed using tissue adhesives (group 1); 134 were sutured (group 2). Assessment by the independent observers revealed an improved mean modified overall POSAS score in group 1 in comparison with group 2 [2.1, 95% CI [1.97-2.25] vs. 2.5, 95% CI [2.39-2.63]; p < 0.001, d = 0.58] and mean VSS score [1.2, 95% CI [0.981-1.34] vs. 1.6, 95% CI [1.49-1.79], p < 0.001, d = 0.53]. At the early follow-up, dehiscence rate was 12.5% in group 1 and 3.7% in group 2 (p < 0.001); later on, one dehiscence remained per group. Mild impairment of QoL was found at the early follow-up in both groups, with no impairment remaining later on. Duration of treatment and treatment costs were lower in group 1. Conclusion: Both modalities of wound closure yield favorable esthetic results, and complications are rare. Adhesives are more cost-effective, and its application is less time-consuming; therefore, tissue adhesives offer considerable advantages when used appropriately. Trial Registration: Public trial registration was performed at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03080467).

Keywords: POSAS; VSS; blinded; glue; outcome; pediatrics; scar; suture.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2021 Fontana, Schiestl, Landolt, Staubli, von Salis, Neuhaus, Mohr and Elrod.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mean Observer score of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) at late follow-up (at 6–12 months). Results are depicted separately by treatment group (blue = group 1, tissue adhesive; red = group 2, suture) for each of the POSAS items and for the POSAS Overall score; and significance levels are indicated. Significance levels are indicated (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results of the online evaluation of 230 scars by independent surgeons for mean modified Observer score of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) are illustrated separately by treatment group (blue = group 1, tissue adhesive, red = group 2, suture). Significance levels are indicated. Significance levels are indicated (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean modified total score of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) shown separately for each of the 230 scars by online evaluation. The mean modified POSAS Total score as evaluated by the five independent, blinded specialists in plastic surgery is shown separately for each of the 230 scars. Results are illustrated by treatment group (blue = group 1, tissue adhesive, red = group 2, suture).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Results of the online evaluation of 230 scars by independent surgeons for mean modified Vancouver Scar Scale Scores are illustrated separately by treatment group (blue = group 1, tissue adhesive, red = group 2, suture). Significance levels are indicated. Significance levels are indicated (**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Exemplary range of photographs scored with the POSAS. This is a compilation of four photographs of facial lacerations, scored by one of the online observers using the POSAS and merely serves for a better illustration [POSAS Observer scale, overall opinion = (a) 1, (b) 3, (c) 5, and (d) 7].

References

    1. McDermott KW, Stocks C, Freeman WJ. Overview of pediatric emergency department visits, 2015. Agency Healthc Res Qual. (2018) 242. Available online at:
    1. Quinn J, Drzewiecki A, Li MM, Stiell IG, Sutcliffe T, Elmslie TJ, et al. . A randomized, controlled trial comparing a tissue adhesive with suturing in the repair of pediatric facial lacerations. Ann Emerg Med. (1993) 22:1130–5. 10.1016/S0196-0644(05)80977-1
    1. Kendall JM, Charters A, McCabe SE. Topical anaesthesia for children's lacerations: an acceptable approach? Emerg Med J. (1996) 13:119–22. 10.1136/emj.13.2.119
    1. Younge PA, Kendall JM. Sedation for children requiring wound repair: a randomised controlled double blind comparison of oral midazolam and oral ketamine. Emerg Med J. (2001) 18:30–3. 10.1136/emj.18.1.30
    1. Salway R, Valenzuela R, Shoenberger J, Mallon W, Viccellio A. Emergency department (ED) overcrowding: evidence-based answers to frequently asked questions. Rev Méd Clín Las Condes. (2017) 28:213–9. 10.1016/j.rmclc.2017.04.008
    1. Mattick A, Clegg G, Beattie T, Ahmad T. A randomised, controlled trial comparing a tissue adhesive (2-octylcyanoacrylate) with adhesive strips (Steristrips) for paediatric laceration repair. Emerg Med J. (2002) 19:405–7. 10.1136/emj.19.5.405
    1. Ste-Marie-Lestage C, Adler S, St-Jean G, Carrière B, Vincent M, Trottier ED, et al. . Complications following chin laceration reparation using tissue adhesive compared to suture in children. Injury. (2019) 50:903–7. 10.1016/j.injury.2019.03.047
    1. Rivera R, Fagan M. Urgent Care Medicine Secrets, Chapter 44 - Laceration Repair. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; (2018). 10.1016/B978-0-323-46215-0.00044-6
    1. Farion KJ, Osmond MH, Hartling L, Russell K, Klassen T, Crumley E, et al. . Tissue adhesives for traumatic lacerations in children and adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2002) CD003326. 10.1002/14651858.CD003326
    1. Shields BJ, Palermo TM, Powers JD, Grewe SD, Smith GA. Predictors of a child's ability to use a visual analogue scale. Child Care Health Dev. (2003) 29:281–90. 10.1046/j.1365-2214.2003.00343.x
    1. Van Laerhoven H, Van Der Zaag-Loonen HJ, Derkx BHF. A comparison of Likert scale and visual analogue scales as response options in children's questionnaires. Acta Paediatr Int J Paediatr. (2004) 93:830–5. 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2004.tb03026.x
    1. Association of Dutch Burn Centres . POSAS. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. The Scale. Available online at: (accessed April 18, 2020).
    1. Van De Kar AL, Corion LUM, Smeulders MJC, Draaijers LJ, Van Der Horst CMAM, Van Zuijlen PPM. Reliable and feasible evaluation of linear scars by the patient and observer scar assessment scale. Plast Reconstr Surg. (2005) 116:514–22. 10.1097/01.prs.0000172982.43599.d6
    1. Truong PT, Lee JC, Soer B, Gaul CA, Olivotto IA. Reliability and validity testing of the patient and observer scar assessment scale in evaluating linear scars after breast cancer surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. (2007) 119:487–94. 10.1097/01.prs.0000252949.77525.bc
    1. Fearmonti RM, Bond JE, Erdmann D, Levin LS, Pizzo S V., Levinson H. The modified patient and observer scar assessment scale: a novel approach to defining pathologic and nonpathologic scarring. Plast Reconstr Surg. (2011) 127:242–7. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f959e8
    1. Sullivan T, Smith J, Kermode J, McIver E, Courtemanche DJ. Rating the burn scar. J Burn Care Rehabil. (1990) 11:256–60. 10.1097/00004630-199005000-00014
    1. Fearmonti R, Bond J, Erdmann D, Levinson H. A review of scar scales and scar measuring devices. J Plast Surg. (2010) 10:e43.
    1. Aird LNF, Bristol SG, Phang PT, Raval MJ, Brown CJ. Randomized double-blind trial comparing the cosmetic outcome of cutting diathermy versus scalpel for skin incisions. Br J Surg. (2015) 102:489–94. 10.1002/bjs.9751
    1. Quinn J V., Wells GA. An assessment of clinical wound evaluation scales. Acad Emerg Med. (1998) 5:583–6. 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02465.x
    1. Olsen JR, Gallacher J, Finlay AY, Piguet V, Francis NA. Quality of life impact of childhood skin conditions measured using the children's dermatology life quality index (CDLQI): A meta-analysis. Br J Dermatol. (2016) 174:853–61. 10.1111/bjd.14361
    1. Chernyshov P V., Tomas-Aragones L, Manolache L, et al. . Quality of life measurement in atopic dermatitis. Position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force on quality of life. J Eur Acad Dermatology Venereol. (2017) 174:853–61. 10.1111/jdv.14058
    1. Holme SA, Man I, Sharpe JL, Dykes PJ, Lewis-Jones MS, Finlay AY. The children's dermatology life quality index: Validation of the cartoon version. Br J Dermatol. (2003) 148:285–90. 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2003.05157.x
    1. Waters A, Sanduhu D, Beattie P, Ezughah F, Lewis-Jones S. Severity stratification of Children's dermatology life quality index (CDLQI) scores. Br J Dermatol. (2010) 163:118–30.
    1. Hunter JD. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Comput Sci Eng. (2007) 9:90–5. 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55
    1. Singer AJ, Thode HC. A review of the literature on octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive. Am J Surg. (2004) 187:238–48. 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.11.017
    1. Zempsky WT, Parrotti D, Grem C, Nichols J. Randomized controlled comparison of cosmetic outcomes of simple facial lacerations closed with Steri StripTM Skin Closures or DermabondTM tissue adhesive. Pediatr Emerg Care. (2004) 20:519–24. 10.1097/
    1. Kantor J. Reliability and photographic equivalency of the scar cosmesis assessment and rating (SCAR) Scale, an outcome measure for postoperative scars. JAMA Dermatology. (2017) 1:55–60. 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.3757
    1. Luck R, Tredway T, Gerard J, Eyal D, Krug L, Flood R. Comparison of cosmetic outcomes of absorbable versus nonabsorbable sutures in pediatric facial lacerations. Pediatr Emerg Care. (2013) 29:691–5. 10.1097/PEC.0b013e3182948f26
    1. Quinn J, Wells G, Sutcliffe T, Jarmuske M, Maw J, Stiell I, et al. . A randomized trial comparing octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and sutures in the management of lacerations. J Am Med Assoc. (1997) 227:527–30. 10.1001/jama.1997.03540430039030
    1. Simons M, Ziviani J, Thorley M, McNee J, Tyack Z. Exploring reliability of scar rating scales using photographs of burns from children aged up to 15 years. J Burn Care Res. (2013) 34:427–38.
    1. Singer AJ, Hollander JE, Quinn JV. Evaluation and management of traumatic lacerations. N Engl J Med. (1997) 16:1142–8. 10.1056/NEJM199710163371607
    1. Bruns TB, Simon HK, McLario DJ, Sullivan KM, Wood RJ, Anand KJS. Laceration repair using a tissue adhesive in a children's emergency department. Pediatrics. (1996) 98:673–5.
    1. McLario D, Bruns T, Zempsky W, Wood R, Sullivan K, Simon H. Long-term appearance of lacerations repaired using a tissue adhesive. Am J Ophthalmol. (1997) 99:193–5. 10.1016/S0002-9394(14)71160-2
    1. Barnett P, Jarman FC, Goodge J, Silk G, Aickin R. Randomised trial of histoacryl blue tissue adhesive glue versus suturing in the repair of paediatric lacerations. J Paediatr Child Health. (1998) 34:548–50. 10.1046/j.1440-1754.1998.00300.x
    1. Bruns TB, Robinson BS, Smith RJ, Kile DL, Davis TP, Sullivan KM, et al. . A new tissue adhesive for laceration repair in children. J Pediatr. (1998) 132:1067–70. 10.1016/S0022-3476(98)70415-9
    1. O'Sullivan R, Oakley E, Starr M. Wound repair in children. Aust Fam Physician. (2006) 35:476–9.
    1. Bruns TB, Worthington JM. Using tissue adhesive for wound repair: A practical guide to Dermabond. Am Fam Physician. (2000) 1:1383–8.
    1. Babl FE, Oakley E, Seaman C, Barnett P, Sharwood LN. High-concentration nitrous oxide for procedural sedation in children: adverse events and depth of sedation. Pediatrics. (2008) 121:e528–32. 10.1542/peds.2007-1044
    1. Lewis-Jones MS, Finlay AY. The children's dermatology life quality index (CDLQI): initial validation and practical use. Br J Dermatol. (2010) 132:942–9. 10.1111/j.1365-2133.1995.tb16953.x
    1. Brown BC, Moss TP, McGrouther DA, Bayat A. Skin scar preconceptions must be challenged: importance of self-perception in skin scarring. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. (2010) 63:1022–9. 10.1016/j.bjps.2009.03.019
    1. Lowe DA, Monuteaux MC, Ziniel S, Stack AM. Predictors of parent satisfaction in pediatric laceration repair. Acad Emerg Med. (2012) 19:1166–72. 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01454.x
    1. Resch KL, Hick JL. Preliminary experience with 2-octylcyanoacrylate in a pediatric emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care. (2000) 16:328–31. 10.1097/00006565-200010000-00005
    1. Gabbe BJ, Simpson PM, Sutherland AM, Palmer CS, Butt W, Bevan C, et al. . Agreement between parent and child report of health-related quality of life: Impact of time postinjury. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care. (2010) 69:1578–82. 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181f8fd5f
    1. Martin-Herz SP, Zatzick DF, McMahon RJ. Health-related quality of life in children and adolescents following traumatic injury: a review. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. (2012) 15:192–214. 10.1007/s10567-012-0115-x
    1. Coutts SJ, Sandhu R, Geh VSY. Tissue glue and iatrogenic eyelid gluing in children. Pediatr Emerg Care. (2012) 28:810–1. 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31826288fa

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere