Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22526415›Full record

Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2012

Reduction of wound infections in laparoscopic-assisted colorectal resections by plastic wound ring drapes (REDWIL)?--A randomized controlled trial.

J C Lauscher, F Grittner, A Stroux, M Zimmermann, M le Claire, H J Buhr, J P Ritz

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. [Surgical site infections-Prevention and treatment strategies].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Don't give up on wound protectors yet.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2013
    Article
  14. Response: don't give up on wound protectors yet.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

J C LauscherDepartment of General, Vascular, and Thoracic Surgery, Charité Campus Benjamin Franklin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12200 Berlin, Germany. johannes.lauscher@charite.de
F Grittner
A Stroux
M Zimmermann
M le Claire
H J Buhr
J P Ritz
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEFranklin University · USHelios Kliniken · DEZimmer Biomet (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurgical site infections (SSIs) are frequent complications in colorectal surgery and may lead to burst abdomen, incisional hernia, and increased perioperative costs. Plastic wound ring drapes (RD) were introduced some decades ago to protect the abdominal wound from bacteria and reduce SSIs. There have been no controlled trials examining the benefit of RD in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The Reduction of wound infections in laparoscopic assisted colorectal resections by plastic wound ring drapes (REDWIL) trial was thus designed to assess their effectiveness in preventing SSIs after elective laparoscopic colorectal resections. MATERIALS/

methodsREDWIL is a randomized controlled monocenter trial with two parallel groups (experimental group with RD and control group without RD). Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection were included. The primary endpoint was SSIs. Secondary outcomes were colonization of the abdominal wall with bacteria, reoperations/readmissions, early/late postoperative complications, and cost of hospital stay. The duration of follow-up was 6 months.

resultsBetween January 2008 and October 2010, 109 patients were randomly assigned to the experimental or control group (with or without RD). Forty-six patients in the RD group and 47 patients in the control group completed follow-up. SSIs developed in ten patients with RD (21.7 %) and six patients without RD (12.8 %) (p = 0.28). An intraoperative swab taken from the abdominal wall was positive in 66.7 % of patients with RD and 57.5 % without RD (p = 0.46). The number of species cultured within one swab was significantly higher in those without RD (p = 0.03). The median total inpatient costs including emergency readmissions were 3,402 ± 4,038 <euro> in the RD group and 3,563 ± 1,735 <euro> in the control group (p = 0.869).

conclusionsRD do not reduce the rate of SSIs in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The inpatient costs are similar with and without RD.

Indexed as

Colorectal SurgeryLaparoscopySurgical EquipmentAdhesivenessFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPlasticsStatistics, NonparametricSurgical Wound InfectionTreatment OutcomePlastics

Identifiers

PMID22526415
OpenAlexW2037414475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.