My son had a suspicious mole removed as a dermatology outpatient. It only needed 2 stitches, but they were non-dissolvable. He was told to see the GP to get them removed after 10 days. We got him a GP appointment today (after 8 days) because they were itchy. The GP has now told him the wound has scabbed over the stitches so will need to be re-opened in order to remove them. He has been sent to a minor injuries unit to get that done. I expect he will now end up with a more of a scar than expected.
My question is - what clinical reason might there have been to use non-dissolvable stitches in the first place?