Loading…

The Treatment of Ingrown Nail: Chemical Matricectomy With Phenol Versus Aesthetic Reconstruction. A Single Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial

In onychocryptosis surgery, incisional and non-incisional matricectomy is indicated according to the stage. The chemical matricectomy with 88% phenol solution is the gold standard and a wedge resection is indicated for more advanced stages. The aesthetic reconstruction has the advantages of the inci...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical medicine 2020-03, Vol.9 (3), p.845
Main Authors: Muriel-Sánchez, Juan Manuel, Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo, Ricardo, Montaño-Jiménez, Pedro, Coheña-Jiménez, Manuel
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In onychocryptosis surgery, incisional and non-incisional matricectomy is indicated according to the stage. The chemical matricectomy with 88% phenol solution is the gold standard and a wedge resection is indicated for more advanced stages. The aesthetic reconstruction has the advantages of the incisional procedure without eponychium incisions and an effectiveness similar to the chemical matricectomy with phenol. To compare the recurrence and the healing time between the chemical matricectomy with phenol and the aesthetic reconstruction. A comparative, prospective, parallel, randomized, and one-blinded clinical trial was registered with the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) with identification number 2019-001294-80. Thrity-four patients (56 feet) with 112 onychocryptosis were randomized in two groups. Thirty-six were treated with chemical matricectomy with phenol and 76 with aesthetic reconstruction. Each patient was blind to the surgical procedure assigned by the investigator. The primary outcome measurements were healing time and recurrence. The secondary outcome measurements were post-surgical bleeding, pain, inflammation, and infection rate. The aesthetic reconstruction procedure presents a shorter healing time (8.2 ± 1.4 days vs. 21.3 ± 3.1 days; < 0.001) with a similar recurrence rate ( = 0.98). Post-operatory bleeding, pain, inflammation, and the infection rate did not show significant differences ( > 0.05). The aesthetic reconstruction presents a shorter healing time, favoring the patients' recuperation, with a recurrence similar to the chemical matricectomy with 88% phenol solution.
ISSN:2077-0383
2077-0383
DOI:10.3390/jcm9030845