ScholarLens Back to search
2001•Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume)Requires access

Absorbable Versus Non-Absorbable Suture in Carpal Tunnel Decompression

Ertan Erel, P. I. PLEASANCE, Omar A. Ahmed, Nicholas B. Hart

Open publisher page 34 citations

Abstract

This randomised prospective clinical study compared the use of an absorbable suture (subcuticular 4:0 polyglactin 910) and a non-absorbable suture (5:0 monofilament polypropylene) for elective carpal tunnel decompression wound closure. An increased perception of pain was reported by the patients in the polypropylene (Prolene) group. At the 6-week assessment, there was a higher level of residual wound inflammation in the polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) group.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This randomised prospective clinical study compared the use of an absorbable suture (subcuticular 4:0 polyglactin 910) and a non-absorbable suture (5:0 monofilament polypropylene) for elective carpal tunnel decompression wound closure. An increased perception of pain was reported by the patients in the polypropylene (Prolene) group. At the 6-week assessment, there was a higher level of residual wound inflammation in the polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) group.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 34 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This randomised prospective clinical study compared the use of an absorbable suture (subcuticular 4:0 polyglactin 910) and a non-absorbable suture (5:0 monofilament polypropylene) for elective carpal tunnel decompression wound closure. An increased perception of pain was reported by the patients in the polypropylene (Prolene) group. At the 6-week assessment, there was a higher level of residual wound inflammation in the polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) group.

Key concepts: Medicine, Vicryl, Prolene, Surgery, Absorbable suture, Decompression, Fibrous joint, Carpal tunnel release

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Absorbable Versus Non-Absorbable Suture in Carpal Tunnel Decompression — Research Paper | ScholarLens