ArticleWorld journal of surgery2016
Mass Continuous Suture versus Layered Interrupted Suture in Transverse Abdominal Incision Closure after Liver Resection.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced recovery program versus traditional care after hepatectomy: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Suture Techniques and Materials for Fascial Closure of Abdominal Wall Incisions: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Incisions in Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery: Surgical Anatomy and its Influence to Open and Close the Abdomen.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbdominal incision closure technique seriously influences patient prognosis. Most studies have focused on the different suture techniques and materials on midline incision, while little data are available in wide transverse or oblique incisions after liver resection (LR). The aim of the present study is to compare the two major incision suture methods after LR in our institute: Mass continuous suture (group P) and layered interrupted suture (group S). STUDY
design258 patients undergoing LR with abdominal transverse or oblique incisions were prospectively enrolled. They were divided into two groups according to different abdominal incision suture methods and compared with the preoperative, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative wound complications.
resultsThere were 118 patients in group P and 140 patients in group S, which was similar in general condition, primary disease, liver, and renal function. Incision length, total operation time, intraoperative blood loss, or perioperative antibiotics use were not different between the two groups. However, abdominal incision closure time and interval time for stitches removing after operation was significantly shorter in group P than group S (both p < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 16 months, the incidence of wound infection and fat liquefaction was more than two times higher in group S than group P, which, however, was not statistically different. Moreover, there was no difference in wound disruption or incisional hernia between the two groups.
conclusionsAlthough similar in occurrence of postoperative wound complications, mass continuous suture with polydioxanone seemed to be more timesaving in incision closure and motivated in wound healing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.