Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22180732›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2011

Absorbable versus silk sutures for surgical treatment of trachomatous trichiasis in Ethiopia: a randomised controlled trial.

Saul N Rajak, Esmael Habtamu, Helen A Weiss, Amir Bedri Kello, Teshome Gebre, Asrat Genet, Robin L Bailey, David C W Mabey, Peng T Khaw, Clare E Gilbert and 2 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

NCT00522860 phase4completednot on this map

A Randomised Controlled Trial of Non-absorbable (Silk) Sutures Verses Absorbable (Vicryl) Sutures During the Surgical Treatment of Trachomatous Trichiasis

TypeinterventionalSponsorLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineRan2008 to 2010Enrolled1,300ConditionsTrachomatous Trichiasis, TrachomaArmsTrichiasis surgery with absorbable sutures, Trichiasis surgery with non-absorbable sutures
NCT07322302 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Repeat Eyelid Surgery for Trichiasis: Optimizing Results in East Africa (RESTORE): A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Two Surgical Techniques for Repeat Trichiasis Surgery Performed by Integrated Eye Care Workers

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel HillRan2026 to 2029Enrolled1,000ConditionsTrachoma, Eye Diseases, TrichiasisArmsB-RAP, BLTR
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions for trachoma trichiasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trachoma.Lancet (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Trachoma.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Saul N RajakThe London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Esmael Habtamu
Helen A Weiss
Amir Bedri Kello
Teshome Gebre
Asrat Genet
Robin L Bailey
David C W Mabey
Peng T Khaw
Clare E Gilbert
Paul M Emerson
Matthew J Burton
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBThe Carter Center · ETUniversity College London · GBAmhara Regional Health Bureau · ETCarter Center · US

Funding

Medical Research Council G0700837Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 080741/Z/06/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTrachoma causes blindness through an anatomical abnormality called trichiasis (lashes touching the eye). Trichiasis can recur after corrective surgery. We tested the hypothesis that using absorbable sutures instead of silk sutures might reduce the risk of recurrent disease among patients with major trichiasis in a randomised trial. METHODS AND

findings1,300 individuals with major trichiasis from rural villages in the Amhara Region of Ethiopia were recruited and assigned (1:1) by computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive trichiasis surgery using either an absorbable suture (polyglactin-910) or silk sutures (removed at 7-10 days) in an otherwise identical surgical technique. Participants were examined every 6 months for 2 years by clinicians masked to allocation. The primary outcome measure was recurrent trichiasis (≥one lash touching the eye) at 1 year. There was no difference in prevalence of recurrent trichiasis at 1 year (114 [18.2%] in the absorbable suture group versus 120 [19.7%] in the silk suture group; odds ratio = 0.90, 95% CI 0.68-1.20). The two groups also did not differ in terms of corneal opacification, visual acuity, conjunctival inflammation, and surgical complications.

conclusionsThere was no evidence that use of absorbable polyglactin-910 sutures was associated with a lower prevalence of trichiasis recurrence at 1 year postsurgery than silk sutures. However, from a programmatic perspective, polyglactin-910 offers the major advantage that patients do not have to be seen soon after surgery for suture removal. The postoperative review after surgery using absorbable polyglactin-910 sutures can be delayed for 3-6 months, which might allow us to better determine whether a patient needs additional surgery.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00522860.

Indexed as

SuturesAdolescentAdultAgedEthiopiaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPolyglactin 910RecurrenceSilkTrachomaTrichiasisYoung AdultPolyglactin 910Silk

Identifiers

PMID22180732
PMCPMC3236737
OpenAlexW2096963032

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.