Tissue Adhesive Versus Sutures for Skin Closure in Primary Cleft Lip Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

<i>Objective</i>To evaluate the effectiveness of cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives versus conventional sutures for skin closure in primary cleft lip repair, focusing on esthetic, clinical, and patient-centered outcomes.<i>Design</i>Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies.<i>Setting</i>Multicenter data synthesis including studies from the United States, the United Kingdom, India, Nigeria, and the Netherlands.<i>Patients, Participants</i>A total of 442 patients undergoing primary cleft lip repair, with 402 contributing extractable outcome data.<i>Interventions</i>Epidermal closure using tissue adhesives (octyl-2-cyanoacrylate, iso-amyl cyanoacrylate, or octyl-2-cyanoacrylate with polyester mesh tape) compared with fine nonabsorbable sutures (nylon, Prolene, or Monocryl).<i>Main Outcome Measure(s)</i>Esthetic scar quality, wound complications, parental satisfaction, operative time, and scar-related secondary parameters (eg, white roll alignment, hypertrophic scarring).<i>Results</i>Eight studies met inclusion criteria, of which 2 were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in esthetic outcomes between adhesives and sutures (SMD -0.05, 95 % confidence interval [95% CI] [-0.28 to 0.18]; I<sup>2</sup> = 12%). Complication rates were comparable (RR 0.93, 95% CI [0.41-2.11]). Operative time was consistently shorter with adhesives, reducing closure by 5 to 7 min per case. Parental satisfaction was uniformly higher in adhesive groups. Evidence certainty was graded moderate for esthetic outcomes and wound complications, and low for operative time and satisfaction.<i>Conclusions</i>Tissue adhesives provide equivalent esthetic and complication outcomes to sutures in cleft lip repair, with added advantages of faster closure and improved parental satisfaction. Incorporating adhesives into cleft protocols may enhance efficiency and patient-centered care, though further high-quality trials with long-term follow-up are warranted.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Published
2026-01-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656251409871
Primary Topic
Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Tissue Adhesive Versus Sutures for Skin Closure in Primary Cleft Lip Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abhilasha Yadav, Anuj Jain, Ankita Chandak
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
article

Tissue Adhesive Versus Sutures for Skin Closure in Primary Cleft Lip Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abhilasha Yadav, Anuj Jain, Ankita Chandak
article en

Abstract

<i>Objective</i>To evaluate the effectiveness of cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives versus conventional sutures for skin closure in primary cleft lip repair, focusing on esthetic, clinical, and patient-centered outcomes.<i>Design</i>Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies.<i>Setting</i>Multicenter data synthesis including studies from the United States, the United Kingdom, India, Nigeria, and the Netherlands.<i>Patients, Participants</i>A total of 442 patients undergoing primary cleft lip repair, with 402 contributing extractable outcome data.<i>Interventions</i>Epidermal closure using tissue adhesives (octyl-2-cyanoacrylate, iso-amyl cyanoacrylate, or octyl-2-cyanoacrylate with polyester mesh tape) compared with fine nonabsorbable sutures (nylon, Prolene, or Monocryl).<i>Main Outcome Measure(s)</i>Esthetic scar quality, wound complications, parental satisfaction, operative time, and scar-related secondary parameters (eg, white roll alignment, hypertrophic scarring).<i>Results</i>Eight studies met inclusion criteria, of which 2 were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in esthetic outcomes between adhesives and sutures (SMD -0.05, 95 % confidence interval [95% CI] [-0.28 to 0.18]; I<sup>2</sup> = 12%). Complication rates were comparable (RR 0.93, 95% CI [0.41-2.11]). Operative time was consistently shorter with adhesives, reducing closure by 5 to 7 min per case. Parental satisfaction was uniformly higher in adhesive groups. Evidence certainty was graded moderate for esthetic outcomes and wound complications, and low for operative time and satisfaction.<i>Conclusions</i>Tissue adhesives provide equivalent esthetic and complication outcomes to sutures in cleft lip repair, with added advantages of faster closure and improved parental satisfaction. Incorporating adhesives into cleft protocols may enhance efficiency and patient-centered care, though further high-quality trials with long-term follow-up are warranted.

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Manubhai Patel Dental College and Hospital (IN), Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College of Dental Sciences & Hospital (IN), Government Dental College and Hospital (IN), Patanjali Research Foundation (IN), Dr D Y Patil Dental College & Hospital (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.