Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLee, Alice
dc.contributor.authorStanley, Guy H M
dc.contributor.authorWade, Ryckie G
dc.contributor.authorBerwick, Daniele
dc.contributor.authorVinicombe, Victoria
dc.contributor.authorSalence, Brogan K
dc.contributor.authorMusbahi, Esra
dc.contributor.authorDe Poli, Anderson R C S
dc.contributor.authorSavu, Mihaela
dc.contributor.authorBatchelor, Jonathan M
dc.contributor.authorAbbott, Rachel A
dc.contributor.authorGardiner, Matthew D
dc.contributor.authorWernham, Aaron
dc.contributor.authorVeitch, David
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-17T13:52:36Z
dc.date.available2023-10-17T13:52:36Z
dc.date.issued2023-03
dc.identifier.citationLee A, Stanley GHM, Wade RG, Berwick D, Vinicombe V, Salence BK, Musbahi E, De Poli ARCS, Savu M, Batchelor JM, Abbott RA, Gardiner MD, Wernham A, Veitch D; CANVAS collaborative. International, prospective cohort study comparing non-absorbable versus absorbable sutures for skin surgery: CANVAS service evaluation. Br J Surg. 2023 Mar 30;110(4):462-470.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0007-1323
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2168
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/bjs/znad008
dc.identifier.pmid36753053
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/2581
dc.description.abstractBackground: Absorbable or non-absorbable sutures can be used for superficial skin closure following excisional skin surgery. There is no consensus among clinicians nor high-quality evidence supporting the choice of suture. The aim of the present study was to determine current suture use and complications at 30 days after excisional skin surgery. Methods: An international, prospective service evaluation of adults undergoing excision of skin lesions (benign and malignant) in primary and secondary care was conducted from 1 September 2020 to 15 April 2021. Routine patient data collected by UK and Australasian collaborator networks were uploaded to REDCap©. Choice of suture and risk of complications were modelled using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Some 3494 patients (4066 excisions) were included; 3246 (92.9 per cent) were from the UK and Ireland. Most patients were men (1945, 55.7 per cent), Caucasian (2849, 81.5 per cent) and aged 75-84 years (965, 27.6 per cent). The most common clinical diagnosis was basal cell carcinoma (1712, 42.1 per cent). Dermatologists performed most procedures, with 1803 excisions (44.3 per cent) on 1657 patients (47.4 per cent). Most defects were closed primarily (2856, 81.9 per cent), and there was equipoise in regard to use of absorbable (2127, 57.7 per cent) or non-absorbable (1558, 42.2 per cent) sutures for superficial closure. The most common complications were surgical-site infection (103, 2.9 per cent) and delayed wound healing (77, 2.2 per cent). In multivariable analysis, use of absorbable suture type was associated with increased patient age, geographical location (UK and Ireland), and surgeon specialty (oral and maxillofacial surgery and plastic surgery), but not with complications. Conclusion: There was equipoise in suture use, and no association between suture type and complications. Definitive evidence from randomized trials is needed.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_US
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
dc.subjectDermatologyen_US
dc.subjectSurgeryen_US
dc.titleInternational, prospective cohort study comparing non-absorbable versus absorbable sutures for skin surgery : CANVAS service evaluationen_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleBritish Journal of Surgery
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
dc.contributor.trustauthorWernham, Aaron
dc.contributor.trustauthorVeitch, David
dc.contributor.departmentDermatologyen_US
dc.contributor.roleMedical and Dentalen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationStoke Mandeville Hospital; Imperial College London; Fiona Stanley Hospital; University of Western Australia; University of Leeds; Leeds General Infirmary; Queen Victoria Hospital; Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust; Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust; Luton and Dunstable University Hospital; Yeovil District Hospital; University Hospital of Wales; Wexham Park Hospital; Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust,; Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics; University of Oxford; Leicester University Hospitals NHS Trust; Walsall Healthcare NHS Trusten_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record