4.6 Article

The use of cyanoacrylate glue for skin grafts stabilisation: A retrospective multicenter study

Journal

INTERNATIONAL WOUND JOURNAL
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 79-84

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13840

Keywords

cyanoacrylate; skin graft; tissue glue; wound closure; wound healing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study retrospectively analyzed skin graft surgeries using cyanoacrylate (CA) tissue glue as a fixation method. The study found a high graft uptake rate compared to other fixation methods. However, partial graft loss was observed in some cases, highlighting the need for further research on long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
Cyanoacrylate (CA) tissue glue is frequently used in various surgical procedures, and it is simple to use and may save time during procedures. We report the use, effectiveness, and postoperative outcomes of patients who have undergone skin graft surgeries in which CA glue was used to stabilise the graft. A retrospective study of patients who underwent skin graft surgeries where CA was used to stabilise the grafts between January 2018 and August 2021 at different medical institutes in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Science, version 23.0 (IBM, Armonk, New York). A total of 36 cases were included. Five patients (13.9%) had diabetes. All cases received antibiotics preoperatively. Two types of harvested skin grafts were used: (a) a non-meshed split-thickness skin graft (n = 24, 66.7%), and (b) a meshed split-thickness skin graft (n = 12, 33.3%). The graft uptake outcome was 100% for 32 patients (88.9%). The most common underlying indication of skin grafting was burn 17 (47.2%), in which 5 (13.9%) developed partial graft loss. The percentage of skin grafts taken using CA was high and comparable to other fixation methods. Further studies may be needed to assess the long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available