Comparative study between combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch and the conventional suturing technique

Figure 1 The technique of applying the combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch and the appearance after placement of the final knot. A: Application; B: Final knot appearance and no suture marks over the wound.

Figure 2 Clinical photographs of the combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch applied on a widely retracted wound and its appearance after complete closure. A: Wound before suturing; B: Wound after suturing.

Figure 3 Statistical analysis. A: Wound size between the two groups are totally different showing no significance (P = 0.909); B: The time needed to suture the wound is less in group 1 compared to the group 2 (P < 0.001); C: The length of the suture needed in the combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch group was less compared to conventional suturing group (P < 0.001); D: Group 1 shows significant results than group 2 in terms of wound size to suturing time ratio (P < 0.001); E: The wound size to suturing length ratio was observed as less in combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch group and high in conventional suturing group in terms of (P < 0.001); F: The suture removal time was recorded less in combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch group than in conventional group (P < 0.001); G: There are better results seen in group 1 than in group 2 in terms of wound size to removal time ratio (P < 0.001); H: In combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch group, according to modified Hollander score scale there are 10 cases which showed excellent outcome whereas in conventional group, there are 5 cases which showed excellent outcome (P < 0.005); I: In group 1, 1 case had superficial infection, whereas in group 2, 3 cases resulted in wound dehiscence (P < 0.005). SCAR: In combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch group, according to modified Hollander score scale there are 10 cases which showed excellent outcome whereas in conventional group, there are 5 cases which showed excellent outcome (P < 0.005).