{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014115092290988056, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010857763300760044, 'mean_word_length': 5.7299270072992705, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of adhesive polyurethane membrane and polypropylene sutures for closure of skin incisions in cats.

Paired skin incisions were made on each side of four cats and closed with either interrupted polypropylene sutures or adhesive polyurethane membrane. The healing of these wounds was compared by gross appearance, break strength determination, and histologic examination. The adhesive polyurethane membranes were quicker and easier to apply, producing a more uniform closure than sutures both clinically and histologically. They adhered strongly to the skin, supporting more wound length than sutures for the first 7 days. There were no differences in break strength between closure techniques. Histologically, the wounds closed with adhesive polyurethane membrane were characterized by a milder inflammatory reaction and greater vascular infiltration than sutured wounds, especially early in the healing period.