Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12804476›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003

Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section.

F Alderdice, D McKenna, J Dornan

4 registry-linked trialsAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00293683 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2004, after this paper: background citation

Cesarean Delivery Skin Closure: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Standard Staples Versus Absorbable Staples

TypeinterventionalSponsorThomas Jefferson UniversityRan2004 to 2014Enrolled120ConditionsCesarean SectionArmsInsorb absorbable skin staple
NCT01008449 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2009, after this paper: background citation

Surgical Staples vs. Absorbable Subcuticular Suture for Wound Closure of Cesarean Deliveries

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamRan2009 to 2011Enrolled398ConditionsWoundArmsSurgical staples, Absorbable Surgical Suture
NCT01211600 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2010, after this paper: background citation

Cesarean Randomized Control Trial Of Sutures vs. Staples (CROSS)

TypeinterventionalSponsorThomas Jefferson UniversityRan2010 to 2014Enrolled746ConditionsCesarean Section, Wound Complications, Patient Satisfaction, Pain MeasurementArmsStaples, Suture
NCT01217567 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2010, after this paper: background citation

Subcuticular Suture Versus Staples for Closure of the Skin After Caesarean Section: A Prospective Randomized Single-blinded Case-Control Study With the Case as it's Own Control.

TypeinterventionalSponsorHolbaek SygehusRan2010 to 2012Enrolled60ConditionsCesarean Section, CicatrixArmsStaples left, subcuticular suture right, Subcuticular suture left side and staples right
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Abdominal surgical incisions for caesarean section.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Methods of delivering the placenta at caesarean section.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008
    Pooled it
  8. Techniques for caesarean section.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Dermatologic conditions in patients of color who are pregnant.International journal of women's dermatology · 2017
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

F AlderdiceSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, The Queens University of Belfast, Royal Maternity Hospital, Institute of Clinical Science, Belfast, Northern Ireland, Ireland, BT12 6BJ. f.a.alderdice@qub.ac.uk
D McKenna
J Dornan
Princess Royal Maternity Hospital · GBQueen's University Belfast · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCaesarean section is a common operation with no agreed standard on operative techniques and materials to use. The skin layer can be repaired by sub cuticular stitch immediately below the skin layer, an interrupted stitch or with skin staples. A great variety of materials and techniques are used for skin closure after caesarean section and there is a need to identify which provide the best outcomes for women.

objectivesTo compare the effects of skin closure techniques and materials on maternal outcomes and time taken to perform a caesarean section. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (August 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised comparisons of skin closure techniques in caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three papers were identified from the search. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. On further inspection two were not considered to be randomised controlled trials. MAIN

resultsOnly one small randomised controlled trial, involving 66 women, was included in the review. Frishman et al compared staples with absorbable sub-cuticular suture for closure following caesarean section. While operating time was significantly shorter when using staples, the use of absorbable sub cuticular suture resulted in less postoperative pain and yielded a better cosmetic result at the post-operative visit. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThere is no conclusive evidence about how the skin should be closed after caesarean section. Questions regarding the best closure technique and material and the outcomes associated with each remain unanswered. The appearance and strength of the scar following caesarean section is important to women and the choice of technique and materials should be made by women in consultation with their obstetrician based on the limited information currently available.

Indexed as

SuturesSuture TechniquesCesarean SectionFemaleHumansPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID12804476
OpenAlexW1902391878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.