Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT07749495

Skin Closure in Prosthetic Joint Surgery: Comparative Evaluation of the "Barbed Sutures and Skin Glue" Technique (Cica-Pro)

No phase Interventional Surgical Wound Knee Arthroplasty Hip Arthroplasty

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: primary knee replacement, Primary hip replacement..
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Surgical Wound, Knee Arthroplasty, Hip Arthroplasty. Basic parameters: from 18 years · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →

Unsure about the terms? Read our patient guide →

Overview

The choice of skin closure (staples vs. monofilament sutures vs. barbed sutures/adhesive) is critical for wound healing quality in prosthetic surgery (hip and knee). The combination of barbed sutures (e.g., Stratafix) and skin glue (e.g., Dermabond) is promising (superior cosmetic outcome, no suture removal, antimicrobial barrier) but has been poorly evaluated prospectively and comparatively in orthopaedics, which justifies this study. The primary objective is to compare the wound healing success rate at two weeks postoperatively between the patient groups. The primary outcome measure is successful wound healing, defined as the absence of wound complications (wound dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, early postoperative infection) during the first two weeks

Interventions

  • Procedure primary knee replacement
    For patients who have undergone knee replacement surgery (K), the study compares the success of wound healing in surgical wounds closed with barbed sutures and adhesive (Group K1) to those closed with staples (Group K2).
  • Procedure Primary hip replacement.
    For patients who have undergone hip replacement surgery (H), the study compares the success of wound healing in surgical wounds closed with barbed sutures and adhesive (Group H1) to those closed with monofilament sutures (Group H2).

Primary outcome measures

  • Rate of Successful Wound Healing at 2 Weeks Postoperatively [Time frame: 2 weeks postoperatively]
Secondary outcome measures (8)
  • Severity Stage of Wound Complications According to DISH Classification [Time frame: 2 weeks postoperatively]
  • Patient-Reported Scar Aesthetic Quality Score [Time frame: 3 months postoperatively]
  • Change from Baseline in Patient Anxiety Evaluated by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) [Time frame: Change from baseline at Week 1 and Week 2 postoperatively]
  • Number of Unplanned Postoperative Wound-Related Medical Consultations [Time frame: Through 3 months postoperatively]
  • Direct Surgical Closure Material Cost per Patient [Time frame: At the time of surgery (Day 0)]
  • Number of Wound-Related Postoperative Phone Calls [Time frame: Through 3 months postoperatively]
  • Postoperative Wound Care and Complication Management Costs per Patient [Time frame: Through 3 months postoperatively]
  • Change from Baseline in Patient Anxiety Evaluated by APAIS-C [Time frame: Change from baseline at Week 1 and Week 2 postoperatively]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Men and women aged over 18 years
  • Patient who has provided written informed consent in duplicate
  • Patient scheduled for a primary hip or knee prosthesis implantation
  • BMI < 30 kg/m²
  • Non-smoker or smoking cessation for more than 4 weeks
  • Patient able to read and understand French
  • Patient with sufficient cognitive capacity to strictly follow study instructions (completion of the calendar)

Exclusion criteria

  • Patient expresses opposition to participating in the study
  • Patients under 18 years of age
  • Patient scheduled for prosthesis revision surgery
  • History of osteoarticular or soft-tissue infection
  • Diabetes, cardiovascular disease, immunodeficiency, or immunosuppressive treatment
  • Consumption of drugs, tobacco, or alcohol
  • Allergy to nickel (staples) or adhesive
  • History of anxiety disorders (generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, specific phobia, agoraphobia, social anxiety, separation anxiety), obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
  • Patient unable to read and/or understand French
  • Individuals deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision
  • Adults unable to consent or incapable of expressing consent
  • Subjects not affiliated with or not benefiting from a social security scheme
  • Pregnant or breastfeeding women

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Open label
Primary purpose
Other

Study locations

Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.

Publications

  • Benkovich V, Abialevich A, Benkovich G. Clinical outcomes of closuring technique in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty: A comparative study of staples technique vs triclosan-coated barbed sutures. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol. 2025 Nov-Dec;69(6):621-626. doi: 10.1016/j.recot.2025.03.006. Epub 2025 Mar 27. English, Spanish. PMID 40157721
  • Russo A, Centola M, Nicodemo A, Masse A. The Use of Barbed Sutures in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review on Clinical-Surgical Outcomes, Costs, and Complications. Healthcare (Basel). 2024 May 23;12(11):1063. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12111063. PMID 38891138
  • Liu T, Tao Y, Zhao R, Hua Y, Feng Z, Zheng Q, Zhang G, Geng L, Fu J, Qian W, Ni M, Wang W. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of three superficial skin closure methods for multi-layer wound closure in total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Arthroplasty. 2024 Sep 11;6(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s42836-024-00271-1. PMID 39261893
  • Khlopas A, Sodhi N, Anis HK, Ehiorobo J, Sultan AA, Mont MA. A Systematic Review of Suture Technologies in Total Knee Arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2019 May 15;34:391-396. PMID 30664226
  • Fillingham YA, Matonick JP, Mendoza V, Parvizi J. Comparing the Water-Tight Closure of Barbed and Conventional Suture Under Static and Dynamic Conditions in an Ex-Vivo Human Knee Arthrotomy Model. Arthroplast Today. 2021 Oct 14;12:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.08.003. eCollection 2021 Dec. PMID 34703862
  • Ainslie-Garcia MH, Anderson LA, Bloch BV, Board TN, Chen AF, Craigie S, Danker W 3rd, Gunja N, Harty J, Hernandez VH, Lebedeva K, Hameed D, Mont MA, Nunley RM, Parvizi J, Perka C, Piuzzi NS, Rolfson O, Rychlik J, Romanini E, Sanz-Ruiz P, Sierra RJ, Suleiman L, Tsiridis E, Vendittoli PA, Wangen H, Zagra L. Identifying Critical Evidence Gaps in Wound Closure and Incision Management After Total Knee PMID 38972434

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07749495 · GHDCSS_RIPH1_ORTHO_3_2025 · 2025-A02223-46

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗