The Comparison Of Continuous Suture With VICRYL Rapide Suture(4/0) To Interrupted Suture With Nomal Silk Suture(4/0)

Objective: according to rabbit experiment, compare continuous sutureusing absorbable material with interrupted suture using silk suture. Providehelpness and referrence to new surgical suturation which will be using inclinic.Materials and Method: the main experiment materials are VICRYLRapide (Polyglactin 910) Suture(4/0)and nomal silk suture (4/0)which areall produced by Johnson-Johnson Company. 50 grown rabbits, after beinghocused and disinfected, are selected 2 incisions zygomorphicly about1cm-1.5cm to the midline in heads. Each incision is about 3-4cm long. Theincisions are divided into two groups, the left ones are interrupted suturedwith silk suture(4/0) and the right ones are continuous sutured with VICRYLRapide (Polyglactin 910) Suture(4/0). They are observed and used to makingpathological section (HE) after surgery.Difference of parameter between result was analyzed by t test and 2independent samples chisquare test with SPSS 13.0statistics software.Results:the first period parameter(14 days after surgery)There were no apparently statistical difference in infection rate betweentwo groups(x~2=1.963 p＞0.05), but have diversity in inflammatory reactionparameter(p=0.02 0.01＜p＜0.05).The best concrescence rate of VICRYL Rapide (Polyglactin 910)Suture group was higher than silk suture group (x~2=4.32 0.01＜p＜0.05).There were no apparently statistical difference in wound dehiscencerate between two groups, (x~2=4.32 p＞0.05) and the silk group has much more wider scar than the absorbable suture group (p=0.004, p＜0.01).The second period parameter (42 days after surgery)There was no statistical diffemce in hypodermatic tissue dehiscencerate between two groups(x2=1.033 p＞0.05).The VICRYL Rapide (Polyglactin 910) Suture group have less scarwidth than the silk suture group (p=0.019, 0.05＞p＞0.01).The VICRYL Rapide (Polyglactin 910) Suture group not only has aprominently higher absorbable rate than silk suture group (x~2=22.82p＜0.01), but also has a apparently better pathologic concrescence rate ofdermatic tissue. (x~2=22.82 p＜0.01)Conclusion: Using absorbable sutures in scalp incisions will havehigher best concrescence rate than using silk sutures, but have no apparentlydifference in infection rate. Using absorbable sutures in scalp incisions canreduce Inflammatory reaction of surgical incisions and postoperativecomplication of sutures. Using absorbable sutures in scalp incisions withcontinuous suture have no difference in fastness of incision with using silksutures, but Using absorbable sutures can reduce scale tissue to form, so thathave a good look. The characteristic, that it will be absorbed in a prescienttime and do not need to remove from the incisions, can help to reduce timein hospital of patients.