A Comparison of Monosyn and Monocryl Sutures in Surgical Wounds

NCT ID: NCT00731913

Last Updated: 2015-03-19

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

48 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2007-07-31

Study Completion Date

2008-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

To better understand surgeon preference when using synthetic, absorbable, monofilament suture by comparing two similar appearing FDA-approved sutures, Monosyn (Aesculap) and Monocryl (Ethicon).

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Physicians have used suture to close wounds for at least 4,000 years. Archaeological records from ancient Egypt show that Egyptians used linen and animal sinew to close wounds. In ancient India, physicians used the pincers of beetles or ants to staple wounds shut. They then cut the insects' bodies off, leaving their jaws (staples) in place. Other natural materials used to close wounds include flax, hair, grass, cotton, silk, pig bristles, and animal gut.

The fundamental principles of wound closure have changed little over 4,000 years. Successful closure of wound involves surgical techniques coupled with knowledge of the physical characteristics and handling of the suture and needle. The selection of proper suture material in closing any surgical defect is important in wound healing, minimizing infection, and achieving optimal cosmetic and functional results.

A great deal of progress has been made since Egyptian times with regard to suture materials and manufacturing processes. Today, sutures are available with a wide variety of characteristics, configuration, manipulability, coefficient of friction, solubility, strength, and immunogenic properties. Yet, sutures are currently rather crudely classified based on a numeric scale according to diameter and tensile strength; descending from 10 to 1, and then descending again from 1-0 to 12-0. This study aims to explore the factors that are important to a surgeon when choosing sutures via evaluating surgeon preference for two types of synthetic, absorbable, monofilament sutures: Monosyn and Monocryl. We hope to initiate a more nuanced exploration of how suture characteristics influence surgeon preference, beyond filament type and size, and how makers of suture may better report and represent these factors.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Wounds

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

1

Subjects with skin lesions requiring surgical excision and repair. One half of the each wound received Monocryl suture and the other half received Monosyn suture.

Absorable, monofilament sutures: Monosyn and Monocryl

Intervention Type OTHER

Subjects were randomized to Monosyn vs. Monocryl suture arms. The designated skin lesion was removed surgically. The surgical repair of the defect was performed by dividing the wound in half by a single Prolene suture. The appropriate suture was opened by the Study Coordinator and passed sterilely to the surgical technician. The surgical technician loaded the suture, and passed it in a blinded fashion to the physician who closed the appropriate half of the surgical defect. One half of the wound was closed with one suture and the other half was closed with the other suture. Each patient served as their own control, as both sutures were used in each study patient.

2

Subjects with skin lesions requiring surgical excision and repair. One half of the each wound received Monocryl suture and the other half received Monosyn suture.

Absorable, monofilament sutures: Monosyn and Monocryl

Intervention Type OTHER

Subjects were randomized to Monosyn vs. Monocryl suture arms. The designated skin lesion was removed surgically. The surgical repair of the defect was performed by dividing the wound in half by a single Prolene suture. The appropriate suture was opened by the Study Coordinator and passed sterilely to the surgical technician. The surgical technician loaded the suture, and passed it in a blinded fashion to the physician who closed the appropriate half of the surgical defect. One half of the wound was closed with one suture and the other half was closed with the other suture. Each patient served as their own control, as both sutures were used in each study patient.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Absorable, monofilament sutures: Monosyn and Monocryl

Subjects were randomized to Monosyn vs. Monocryl suture arms. The designated skin lesion was removed surgically. The surgical repair of the defect was performed by dividing the wound in half by a single Prolene suture. The appropriate suture was opened by the Study Coordinator and passed sterilely to the surgical technician. The surgical technician loaded the suture, and passed it in a blinded fashion to the physician who closed the appropriate half of the surgical defect. One half of the wound was closed with one suture and the other half was closed with the other suture. Each patient served as their own control, as both sutures were used in each study patient.

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Monofilament, absorbable sutures

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Specific eligibility requirements included surgical defects that are linear, without curvature, 3.0 cm in length or greater and extending into the subcutis or fascia.
* All surgical defects were required to be closed primarily (that is without flaps or grafts) and had equal skin integrity on both halves of their surgical defects.
* All subjects were capable of providing written informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria

* Unable to provide written informed consent
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Tufts Medical Center

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Tufts Medical Center

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Gary S Rogers, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Tufts Medical Center

Linh K. Lu, MD, PhD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Tufts Medical Center

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Tufts Medical Center

Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

8229

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Suture Closure Trial
NCT05261425 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA
Dyed vs. Undyed Polyglactin Sutures in Cutaneous Surgery
NCT07078669 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION NA