ArticleJAMA surgery2019
Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes of Sutureless vs Sutured Closure Techniques in Gastroschisis Repair.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparative study of suture versus sutureless circumcision: Evaluating cosmetic outcomes, wound dehiscence and infection rates.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Use of a new vertical traction device for early traction-assisted staged closure of congenital abdominal wall defects: a prospective series of 16 patients.Pediatric surgery international · 2024Article
- Case Report: foetal gastroschisis with ideal pregnancy outcomes under multidisciplinary treatment management.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- Improved Mortality of Patients with Gastroschisis: A Historical Literature Review of Advances in Surgery and Critical Care from 1960-2020.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Fetal Surgery for Gastroschisis-A Review with Emphasis on Minimally Invasive Procedures.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Long-term hospital admissions and surgical treatment of children with congenital abdominal wall defects: a population-based study.European journal of pediatrics · 2021Article
- Abdominal Wall Defects-Current Treatments.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Sutureless closure for the management of gastroschisis.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2021Review
- Gastroschisis: A State-of-the-Art Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Immediate versus silo closure for gastroschisis: Results of a large multicenter study.Journal of pediatric surgery · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Sutureless gastroschisis repair offers an alternative to the traditional sutured method and has been associated with decreased intubation time. Published study results are inconsistent regarding the advantages of sutureless closure. Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of sutureless and sutured gastroschisis repair. Design, Setting, and Participants: A single-center cohort review was performed of all consecutive patients (n = 97) who underwent gastroschisis repair from February 1, 2007, to April 30, 2017, at the University of California, San Francisco. Patients' medical records were evaluated for clinical characteristics and outcomes. Cases with incomplete data during initial hospitalization were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: Length of hospital stay, time to full enteral feeds, total parenteral nutrition duration, days requiring intravenous analgesia, days intubated, wound infection rate, antibiotic treatment duration, rate of umbilical hernias that required an operation, and readmission rate. Results: In total, 97 patients (47 [48%] were female and 50 [52%] were male with a mean [SD] age of 2.8 [2.8] days) underwent gastroschisis repair, of which 7 were excluded for incomplete medical record. Of the 90 patients included in the study, 50 (56%) underwent sutured closure and 40 (44%) underwent sutureless closure. No statistical difference was found between the sutured and sutureless groups in length of hospital stay (mean [SD] days, 43.9 [40.4] vs 36.7 [21.2]; P = .71), time to full enteral feeds (mean [SD] days, 31.4 [20.2] vs 27.9 [17.3]; P = .22), total parenteral nutrition duration (mean [SD] days, 33.5 [29.8] vs 27.4 [18.2]; P = .23), wound infection rates (14 [28%] vs 10 [25%]; P = .81), and readmission rates (5 [10%] vs 7 [18%]; P = .36). The sutureless group, compared with the sutured group, had substantially fewer days receiving antibiotics (mean [SD], 7.2 [6.4] vs 12.4 [13.2]; P = .003), fewer days intubated (mean [SD], 2.8 [3.3] vs 6.8 [1.3]; P = .001), fewer days receiving intravenous analgesia (mean [SD], 4.2 [4.0] vs 7.1 [4.5]; P = .003), and fewer patients that required silo reduction (25 [63%] vs 48 [96%]; P < .001). Sutureless closures, compared with the sutured technique, had considerably more umbilical hernias requiring surgical repair (5 [13%] vs 0; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: Sutureless repair of gastroschisis appears to be associated with a statistically significant reduction in mechanical ventilation duration and pain medication requirements but may increase umbilical hernia risk. Multicenter randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine the true advantages of the sutureless approach.
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.