Aims and Objectives <p>To compare the surgical outcome of Vicryl Rapide and Prolene sutures in skin closure of patients operated for unilateral and bilateral cleft lip in our, Craniofacial Unit from 2013 to 2015.</p> Materials and Methods <p>A total of 100 patients were included in the study who were randomly divided into the Vicryl rapide group (<i>n</i> = 50) and prolene group (<i>n</i> = 50). Clinical assessment was done for inflammation, infection, dehiscence, scarring, and esthetic outcome. Also, the duration of hospital stay, the need for general anesthesia for suture removal, and the expenditure of the surgery were considered. A subjective assessment was done based on the patient observer scar assessment scale (POSAS). Follow-ups were scheduled at 1&#xa0;week, 1&#xa0;month, 3&#xa0;months, and 6&#xa0;months.</p> Results <p>Prolene had significantly less scar and a better color match with adjacent skin than vicryl rapide; whereas vicryl rapide is economic and reduces hospital stay as it does not require additional general anesthesia exposure for suture removal. Post-operative complications were similar in both groups.</p> Conclusion <p>Vicryl Rapide is as good as prolene as a suture material of choice in terms of postoperative complications. Thus, both these materials have their advantages and disadvantages and can be equivalently used in skin closure for cleft lips.</p>