ArticleWorld journal of surgery2017
The Benefits of a Wound Protector in Preventing Incisional Surgical Site Infection in Elective Open Digestive Surgery: A Large-Scale Cohort Study.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- SURGICAL SITE INFECTION IN RESECTIONS OF DIGESTIVE SYSTEM TUMOURS.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Review
- Prevention of incisional surgical site infection by subfascial closed suction drainage after open laparotomy: a single surgeon experience in 250 consecutive patients.Patient safety in surgery · 2023Article
- Delphi Consensus on Intraoperative Technical/Surgical Aspects to Prevent Surgical Site Infection after Colorectal Surgery.Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2022Article
- Cost analysis of utilising wound edge protector in open appendicectomy to prevent surgical site infection.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
- Effects of a surgical checklist on decreasing incisional infections following foreign body removal from the gastrointestinal tract in dogs.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this study was to evaluate the benefits of wound protectors (WPs) in preventing incisional surgical site infection (I-SSI) in open elective digestive surgery using data from a large-scale, multi-institutional cohort study.
methodsPatients who had elective digestive surgery for malignant neoplasms between November 2009 and February 2011 were included. The protective value of WPs against I-SSI was evaluated.
resultsA total of 3201 patients were analyzed. A WP was used in 1022 patients (32%). The incident rate of I-SSI (not including organ/space SSI) was 9%. In the univariate and the multivariate analyses for perioperative risk factors for I-SSI, the use of WP was an independent favorable factor that reduced the incidence of I-SSI (odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.98. P = 0.038). The subgroup forest plot analyses revealed that WP reduced the risk of I-SSI only in patients aged 74 years or younger, males, non-obese patients (body mass index <25 kg/m
conclusionsWP is a useful device for preventing superficial I-SSI in open elective digestive surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000004723.
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.