- Joined
- Mar 8, 2010
- Messages
- 44
- Reaction score
- 0
Why don't we use absorbable staples in the foot and ankle for the skin? I haven't seen anyone use it in the forefoot or hind-foot. What do you guys think?
Sutures
- Thread starter sinustarsi
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 2
Cost/benefit. Why use something that cost x10 more than simple sutures? Why not the foot? No use really, sutures work fine in relatively low tension with a better cosmetic outcome. Why not ankle? Not as easy to remove if you have a reaction, infection, cost, cosmesis..not to mention the most obvious which is that ordinary staples work just fine. I just don't see the advantages.
From their own website... "Priced at $45, the INSORB|25 subcuticular skin stapler is significantly more costly than either a pack of suture or a traditional metal skin stapler, both of which are commodity items and can be purchased for less than $10. Even factoring in the cost of a staple remover (less than $5), the INSORB|25 represents a fairly expensive skin closure option."
Other than for some rare specialties (perhaps OB/GYN), no surgical center, hospital or private practice would stock something that expensive.
Last edited:
