I would also expect most 3cm facial lacerations will likely require careful suturing to achieve best results, but I fully accept that there will be a few occasions when glue would be considered OK from a closure point of view.
As a bite laceration usually requires some effective and vigorous cleaning before primary closure, I would expect that some anaesthesia will be used on such patients. This might well eliminate one of the reasons to choose glue over sutures as well...
With the above considered, I would generally expect that glue for such a laceration will not be a common choice.
Having said that, I would not say "no glue for bites" as a general rule. We know that the practitioner must realise that proper cleaning is the most important part of the job by far, or else ANY closure is risking trapping of contaminants and a nasty infection. Then, when it comes to the choice of method of closure, I don't see a reason to "ban" glue - it's just unlikely to be a wound for which it will be as effective a method as sutures. Unlikely, but not a "never" for me.
From: Bill Schroeder <[log in to unmask]>
I agree, no glue for bites.
I don't think that I would have glued any lac that was 3cm in length either.
Bill Schroeder, DO
> On May 25, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Kevin Schreiber <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hello all,
> I had a child that I received for a follow up visit, s/p dog bite, 3 cm to
> the face. She was seen in a peds ER and the decision was made to dermabond
> her dog bite. I was always taught that we NEVER glue bites. Has this
> changed? Do any of you have new literature / evidence / or practice
> guidelines that it is OK to glue animal bite lacerations?
> Kevin Schreiber, MD
For more information, send mail to [log in to unmask] with the message: info PED-EM-L
The URL for the PED-EM-L Web Page is: