In the past, late closure or second intention healing were accepted bearing in mind possible infection risks and the fact that dog bites should not be treated with first intention closure. These tendencies are mentioned as past history in articles written by Lackmann, Stefanopulous, Morgan, Akhtar and Wolf. In all patients recorded in the present study a primary closure was performed after cleansing with the tertiary solution isodine, peroxide and 0.9% physiological solution.
En el pasado, era aceptable el cierre tardío o la cicatrización por segunda intención, lo anterior era pensado debido al riesgo de infección y que las lesiones de mordedura de perro no debían ser tratadas con un cierre de primera intención, los cuales son referenciados como historia en los artículos de Lackmann, Stefanopoulos, Morgan, Akhtar y Wolf, respectivamente.