{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05234375, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00234375, 'mean_word_length': 6.237288135593221, '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}}
Columellar Scar Following Open Rhinoplasty Using Absorbable Suture Versus Nonabsorbable Suture: A Meta-analysis.

Objective: This meta-analysis seeks to determine whether a difference in long-term scar outcomes exists between absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures for closure of the columellar incision after open rhinoplasty. Review Methods: PubMed, OVID Medline, Conference Papers Index, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using terms including "suture," "sutures," "absorbable," "columella," "columellar," "transcolumellar," "trans-columellar," "rhinoplasty," "septorhinoplasty," "scar," "scars," and "scarring," as well as associated MeSH terms. Results: Six studies with 435 patients were included for systematic review and meta-analysis, with five studies included in meta-analysis for patient-reported outcomes, and six studies included for physician-reported outcomes. There was no significant difference in scar appearance between the absorbable suture group and nonabsorbable group among both patient-reported and physician-reported outcomes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis of six studies meeting inclusion criteria does not demonstrate a significant difference in long-term scar appearance based on suture type after open rhinoplasty.