Comparison of the aesthetic and functional efficacy of subcuticular running closure (3/0 rapid absorbable 910 polyglactin) with N-BUTYL cyanoacrylate in episiotomy repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the aesthetic and functional efficacies of n-butyl cyanoacrylate and 3/0 rapid absorbable polyglactin 910 sutures in cutaneous repair during episiotomy. This study involved 52 cases of patients who had spontaneous vaginal delivery and episiotomy. The cases were randomized among to the type of cutaneous repair during their episiotomy. The perineal skin was repaired by taping with n-butyl cyanoacrylate (group 1) or by suturing with subcuticular 3/0 rapid absorbable polyglactin 910 suture (group 2). These two groups of patients were compared in terms of duration of repair, postpartum pain, healing and cosmetic outcomes, and dyspareunia at 48 hours and 6 weeks postpartum. The incidence of episiotomy skin dehiscence was lower in group 2 than group 1 but it was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The average visual analog score of group 1 was statistically significantly lower at 48 hours postpartum (1.40 ± 0.50 vs. 3.44 ± 0.93, p < 0.01) and at 6 weeks (1.12 ± 0.72 vs. 2.07 ± 0.82, p < 0.01) compared with that of group 2. Also, the count of paracetamol pills used in the first 48 hours was significantly lower in the tissue glue group (1.97 ± 0.93 vs. 2.67 ± 1.21, p < 0.05). Dyspareunia incidences in the first coitus following vaginal delivery showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Similarly, the mean Vancouver scar score showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups. The duration of operation was shorter for group 1 than for group 2 (0.81 ± 0.62 vs. 2.12 ± 0.33, p < 0.001). The efficacy of using n-butyl cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives versus 3/0 rapid absorbable polyglactin 910 sutures for cutaneous episiotomy repair was similar. However, taping with tissue adhesive has the advantages of fast application and a painless postpartum period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".