Clinical Trials Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Methodol. Oct 28, 2020; 10(1): 1-6
Published online Oct 28, 2020. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v10.i1.1
Randomized clinical trial comparing skin closure with tissue adhesives vs subcuticular suture after robotic urogynecologic procedures
Sunetris Fluellen, Kyle Mackey, Karen Hagglund, Muhammad Faisal Aslam
Sunetris Fluellen, Kyle Mackey, Muhammad Faisal Aslam, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ascension St John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI 48236, United States
Karen Hagglund, Medical Research, Ascension St John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI 48236, United States
Author contributions: Fluellen S designed and performed the research study; Mackey K wrote manuscript; Hagglund K performed data analysis; Aslam MF designed research study.
Institutional review board statement: This study was reviewed and approved by Ascension St John Hospital Institutional Review Board, reference number 1165375.
Clinical trial registration statement: This study is registered at with an ID: NCT03891004.
Informed consent statement: All subjects in this study provided informed written consent prior to study enrollment.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All authors in this study do not have any conflict-of-interests.
Data sharing statement: Dataset available from the corresponding author at
CONSORT 2010 statement: The authors confirm that the manuscript was prepared according to the CONSORT 2010 statement.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See:
Corresponding author: Kyle Mackey, MD, Doctor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ascension St John Hospital and Medical Center, 22101 Moross Road, Detroit, MI 48236, United States.
Received: March 9, 2020
Peer-review started: March 9, 2020
First decision: September 21, 2020
Revised: October 6, 2020
Accepted: October 13, 2020
Article in press: October 13, 2020
Published online: October 28, 2020
Research background

Skin closure method during robotic urogynecologic procedures can vary overall operative time and costs. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive is a potential method to reduce this as compared to subcuticular suture, and maintain incisional cosmesis while not jeopardizing wound complications.

Research motivation

A faster yet comparable method for skin closure during robotic urogynecologic procedures may significantly reduce operative time and costs while maintaining or even improving incisional cosmesis.

Research objectives

To compare skin closure via cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive and subcuticular suture during robotic urogynecologic procedures.

Research methods

Fifty subjects were randomized to have port site closure with either cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive or subcuticular suture. Subjects were follow for 12-wk posteroperatively to evaluate incisional cosmesis and complications.

Research results

Closure time was significantly reduced using cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive than with subcuticular suture. Cosmesis scores were greater in the cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive group. No differences in bleeding, infection, or dehiscence existed.

Research conclusions

Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive for skin closure during robotic urogynecologic procedures reduces operative time and improves incisional cosmesis compared to subcuticular suture. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive is a reasonable alternative for skin closure during robotic urogynecologic procedures.

Research perspectives

The utility of tissue adhesive as reducing operative time and overall costs is a potential area of future investigation.