Trial Outcomes & Findings for Tissue Glue (Cyanoacrylate) Versus Conventional Suture in Kidney Donors (NCT NCT01521871)

NCT ID: NCT01521871

Last Updated: 2014-11-04

Results Overview

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for rubor (0-3; 0: pale, 3: typically infectious). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

PHASE4

Target enrollment

64 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

At postoperative day 2 (2 days after kidney donation)

Results posted on

2014-11-04

Participant Flow

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Conventional Suture + Dressing
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing : Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue : The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Overall Study
STARTED
32
32
Overall Study
COMPLETED
32
32
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
0
0

Reasons for withdrawal

Withdrawal data not reported

Baseline Characteristics

Tissue Glue (Cyanoacrylate) Versus Conventional Suture in Kidney Donors

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing : Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue : The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Total
n=64 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
32 Participants
n=5 Participants
26 Participants
n=7 Participants
58 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
6 Participants
n=7 Participants
6 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Continuous
47.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.25 • n=5 Participants
48.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.58 • n=7 Participants
47.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.4 • n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
16 Participants
n=5 Participants
22 Participants
n=7 Participants
38 Participants
n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
16 Participants
n=5 Participants
10 Participants
n=7 Participants
26 Participants
n=5 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Norway
32 participants
n=5 Participants
32 participants
n=7 Participants
64 participants
n=5 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At postoperative day 2 (2 days after kidney donation)

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for rubor (0-3; 0: pale, 3: typically infectious). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Rubor Postoperative Day 2.
0.516 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.311
0.984 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.364

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At postop. day 4 (4 days after kidney donation)

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for rubor (0-3; 0: pale, 3: typically infectious). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 4 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Rubor Postoperative Day 4.
0.547 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.261
0.750 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.335

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At departure from Surgical Dep. to the patients home, usually at postop. day 4, 5, 6 or 7

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for rubor (0-3; 0: pale, 3: typically infectious). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 4 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Rubor at Discharge From Hospital.
0.476 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.288
0.639 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.279

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Postop. day 2

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for secretion ((0-3; 0: totally dry - 3: continuous secretion). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Secretion Postoperative Day 2.
0.328 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.478
0.594 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.384

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Postop. day 4

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for secretion ((0-3; 0: totally dry - 3: continuous secretion). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 4 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Secretion Postoperative Day 4.
0.375 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.484
0.117 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.275

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At departure from Surgical Dep. to the patients home, usually at postop. day 4, 5, 6 or 7

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for secretion ((0-3; 0: totally dry - 3: continuous secretion). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 4 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Secretion at Discharge From Hospital.
0.286 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.396
0.028 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.115

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Postop. day 2

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for oedema (0-1; 0: no elevation - 1: oedema causing \> 2 mm elevation). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Oedema Postoperative Day 2.
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0
0.094 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.292

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Postop. day 4

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for oedema (0-1; 0: no elevation - 1: oedema causing \> 2 mm elevation). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Oedema Postoperative Day 4.
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0
0.083 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.227

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At departure from Surgical Dep. to the patients home, usually at postop. day 4, 5, 6 or 7

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for oedema (0-1; 0: no elevation - 1: oedema causing \> 2 mm elevation). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Oedema at Discharge From Hospital.
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0
0.111 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.266

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At postop. day 2 (2 days after kidney donation)

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for blisters (0: none - 3: abundant). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Blisters Postoperative Day 2.
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0
0.156 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.507

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At postop. day 4 (4 days after kidney donation)

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for blisters (0: none - 3: abundant). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Blisters Postoperative Day 4.
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0
0.200 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.542

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At departure from Surgical Dep. to the patients home, usually at postop. day 4, 5, 6 or 7

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for blisters (0: none - 3: abundant). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Blisters at Discharge From Hospital.
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0
0.028 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.115

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Postop. day 2

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for gaps (0: no gap - 3: need for resuture/strips). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Gaps Postoperative Day 2.
0.094 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.522
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Postop. day 4

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for gaps (0: no gap - 3: need for resuture/strips). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Gaps Postoperative Day 4.
0.344 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.888
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: At departure from Surgical Dep. to the patients home, usually at postop. day 4, 5, 6 or 7

The evaluation is performed by the use of a previously set numerical scale for gaps (0: no gap - 3: need for resuture/strips). Both arms/groups are evaluated day 2 postoperatively to measure any difference between the two skin closure methods. A high score is used as indicator of traumaticity towards the skin and a higher potential for wound infection.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Wound Healing by Numerical Scales for Gaps at Discharge From Hospital.
0.400 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.917
0 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: The specific time required for skin closure (tissue adhesive versus suture) was recorded, counted from initial application of adhesive/intracutaneous suture until final dressing.

The specific time required for skin closure (tissue adhesive versus suture) was recorded, counted from initial application of adhesive/intracutaneous suture until final dressing.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
TIme Consumption
5.832 minutes
Standard Deviation 1.785
8.594 minutes
Standard Deviation 2.253

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: These data were collected at the day of discharge from hospital (postoperative day 4-8).

The patients' self-satisfaction was evaluated by means of a questionnaire rating the following 3 domains on a numerical (1-5) scale: * Total satisfaction regarding wound healing/wound care. 1 (satisfied) to 5 (dissatisfied) * Satisfaction regarding wound discomfort; pain, itching, paresthesia, pressure etc. 1 (almost no discomfort) to 5 (lot of discomfort) * Satisfaction regarding wound care; suppleness, practicability versus mobilization, showering etc. 1 (almost no practical challenges) to 5 (lot of practical challenges) Patients' Self Satisfaction score was the sum of three domains, ranges from 3 (completely satisfied) to 15 (completely dissatisfied). These data were collected at the day of discharge, with guidance from two interviewers.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Tissue Glue Wound Closure
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by tissue glue Skin wound closure by tissue glue: The glue is used both as closure device and as wound dressing.
Conventional Suture + Dressing
n=32 Participants
Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing Skin wound closure by conventional suture + dressing: Suture: Intracutaneous skin closure, by running, absorbable suture (Caprosyn 4-0) Dressing: Conventional textile dressing (Mepor)
Patients´Self Satisfaction.
4.968 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.531
4.875 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.996

Adverse Events

Conventional Suture + Dressing

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Tissue Glue Wound Closure

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Additional Information

Dr. Ole Øyen

Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet

Phone: +4723070000

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place