MPS  Vol.2 No.2 , April 2012
Dermabond Protape (Prineo) for Wound Closure in Plastic Surgery
Dermabond Protape (2-octyl-cyanoacrylate and pressure sensitive adhesive mesh; Prineo, Closure Medical Corporation) is a topical mesh and skin adhesive that forms a strong polymeric bond across opposed wound edges allowing the normal healing process to occur. No published studies have already compared the use of a topical mesh en skin adhesive in wound closure. This study evaluated the possible applications of a combined mesh-adhesive system in 100 plastic surgery operations (14 different surgical procedures) with a mean follow-up of 85.5 days. The rate of allergic reaction, infection, wound dehiscence and hypertrophic scar formation were recorded in relation to patient co-morbidities, medication and tobacco consumption. No technical restrictions were found during the Dermabond Protape application. The average time for the topical mesh and skin adhesive application was 2 minutes. The Dermabond protape was removed 7 through 10 days after the operation. Three patients (3/100 or 3%) reported an allergic reaction without increased scar formation. Hyper-inflammation in one or more wound areas with a micro-abscess were noted in 11 different patients probably due to polyglactin 910 (vicryl) sutures at their scheduled follow-up visit 1 week after their operation. Increased tissue inflammation and scar formation were found in these patients with hypertrophic scars in 1 patient (1/11 or 9.1%). One upper leg wound dehiscence was seen in a diabetes mellitus patient using corticosteroids. Two patients (2/100 or 2%) with a history of tobacco abuse showed a partial wound dehiscence after an abdominoplasty and a partial areola dehiscence after mamma reduction respectively (Table 2).

Cite this paper
M. P. J. Loonen and M. A. M. Depoorter, "Dermabond Protape (Prineo) for Wound Closure in Plastic Surgery," Modern Plastic Surgery, Vol. 2 No. 2, 2012, pp. 20-23. doi: 10.4236/mps.2012.22005.
[1]   J. Quinn, G. Wells, T. Sutcliffe, et al., “A Randomized Trial Comparing Octylcyanoacrylate Tissue Adhesive and Sutures in the Management of Lacerations,” JAMA, Vol. 277, No. 19, 1997, pp. 1527-1530. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540430039030

[2]   O. Laccourreye, R. Cauchois, L. EL Sharkawy, et al., “Octylcyanoacrylate (Dermabond) for Skin Closure at the Time of Head and Neck Surgery: A Longitudinal Prospective Study,” Annales de Chirurgie, Vol. 130, No. 10, 2005, pp. 624-630. doi:10.1016/j.anchir.2005.10.003

[3]   A. Silvestri, C. Brandi, L. Grimaldi, et al., “Octyl-2-Cya noacrylate Adhesive for Skin Closure and Prevention of Infection in Plastic Surgery,” Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Vol. 30, No. 6, 2006, pp. 695-699. doi:10.1007/s00266-006-0139-z

[4]   N.C.B.I.-N.L.M.-N.I.H., “Service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health,” 2010. http://www.ncbi.nlm.

[5]   S. Bhende, S. Rothenburger, D. Spangler, et al., “In Vitro Assessment of Microbial Barrier Properties of Dermabond Topical Skin Adhesive,” Surgical Infections, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2002, pp. 251-257. doi:10.1089/109629602761624216

[6]   E. F. Switzer, R. C. Dinsmore and J.H. North Jr., “Subcuticular Closure versus Dermabond: A Prospective Randomized Trial,” American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 69, No. 5, 2003, pp. 434-436.

[7]   A. W. Perry and M. Sosin, “Severe allergic reaction to Dermabond,” Aesthetic Surgery Journal, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2009, pp. 314-316. doi:10.1016/j.asj.2009.02.019

[8]   C. M. Hivnor and M. L. Hudkins, “Allergic Contact Dermatitis after Postsurgical Repair with 2-Octylcyanoacrylate,” Archives of Dermatology, Vol. 144, No. 6, 2008, pp. 814-815. doi:10.1001/archderm.144.6.814

[9]   K. M. Dunst, J. Auboeck, B. Zahel, B. Raffier, et al., “Extensive Allergic Reaction to a New Wound Closure Device (Prineo),” Allergy, 11 November 2009. (EPUB ahead of Print).