Clinical Study Skin Closure in Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Modern Tissue Adhesive versus Conventional Intracutaneous Suture—A Randomized Study Silje Marie Vormdal, 1,2 Morten Skauby, 1 Silje Lonar, 1,2 and Ole Øyen 1 1 Clinic for Cancer, Surgery and Transplantation, Section for Transplant Surgery, Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, 0027 Oslo, Norway 2 Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway Correspondence should be addressed to Silje Marie Vormdal; s.m.vormdal@studmed.uio.no Received 22 December 2013; Accepted 1 February 2014; Published 9 March 2014 Academic Editors: F. Agresta, G. Miyano, S. Morales-Conde, and H. Scheidbach Copyright © 2014 Silje Marie Vormdal et al. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Purpose. To compare the modern tissue adhesive cyanoacrylate (Liquiband) to conventional, intracutaneous suture and dressing, with regard to wound characteristics, time consumption, donors’ self-satisfaction, and cost. Methods. Sixty-four kidney donors, subjected to laparoscopic hand-assisted nephrectomy, were randomly assigned to skin closure either with tissue adhesive ( = 32) or suture ( = 32). Te follow-up assessments were carried out on postoperative days 2, 4 and at departure, evaluated by the use of a previously set numerical scale for rubor, secretion, gaps, oedema, and blisters. Infections and complications/reinterventions were recorded, as well as operative/skin closure time and costs. Te donors’ self-satisfaction was evaluated by means of a questionnaire. Results. Tere were signifcant results in favour of tissue adhesive regarding wound closure time and the wound characteristics “rubor,” “blisters,” and “oedema.” Although, the wound parameters “secretion” and “gaps” altogether showed a rather evident tendency in favour of suture, partially at signifcant levels. A low rate of complications/reoperations/infections did not give rise to any signifcant diferences. Conclusion. Our study concludes that gluing is signifcantly faster, less traumatic by avoiding needle penetrations, but associated with an increased rate of secretion and gaps—presumably depending on gluing technique. Glue seems particularly suitable for small, laparoscopic/trocar incisions. 1. Introduction In the past, the options for wound closure have mostly been limited to sutures and staples. Adhesive tapes and tissue adhesives have entered clinical practice more recently. Various kinds of tissue adhesives/glues have been used since the 1950’s [1]. Te adhesives used previously were appropriate for superfcial lacerations and small incisions, but their limited physical properties prevented their use in the management of larger wounds [1]. Further development led to the introduction of n-2-butylcyanoacrylates that were purer and stronger [1]. However, the clinical performances of these adhesives were limited by low tensile strength and brittleness [2, 3]. More recently, stronger tissue adhesives have been developed by combining plasticisers and stabilisers to increase fexibility and reduce toxicity when applied topically for skin closure [4]. Cyanoacrylate was introduced in 1949 and was used for skin closure since 1959 [1]. Since 2000, there have been many reports including Cochrane reviews on the use and safety of tissue adhesive for skin closure [1, 5]. Tese publications indicate that cyanoacrylate provides a satisfactory alternative to conventional methods of skin closure methods. Te mod- ern tissue adhesives seem to be less traumatic; application takes shorter time and it is cosmetically equivalent compared with conventional closure [1, 4–11]. Still, very few randomized Hindawi Publishing Corporation ISRN Minimally Invasive Surgery Volume 2014, Article ID 859236, 7 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/859236