Absorbable Versus Non-Absorbable Suture in Carpal Tunnel Decompression

Abstract

This randomised prospective clinical study compared the use of an absorbable suture (subcuticular 4:0 polyglactin 910) and a non-absorbable suture (5:0 monofilament polypropylene) for elective carpal tunnel decompression wound closure. An increased perception of pain was reported by the patients in the polypropylene (Prolene) group. At the 6-week assessment, there was a higher level of residual wound inflammation in the polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) group.