ArticleInternational orthopaedics2019
A comparison of the use and non-use of closed suction wound drainage in open reduction and internal fixation of femoral shaft fractures.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Value of closed suction drainage in arthroscopic and minimally invasive surgery of the ankle joint: a prospective randomised study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Trial
- Utility of prophylactic closed suction drainage in open reduction and internal fixation for tibial plateau fracture.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Article
- Effect of Drain Duration and Output on Perioperative Outcomes and Readmissions after Lumbar Spine Surgery.Asian spine journal · 2023Article
- About Orthopaedic awards, drains, patients safety and outcomes.International orthopaedics · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to determine if the routine use of closed suction wound drainage is justified following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of femoral shaft fractures.
methodThis was a prospective comparative study of two study groups: those with post-operative closed suction drainage (WCSD) and those not with closed suction drainage (NWCSD).
resultsFifty-six patients, twenty-eight each for the two cohorts, were recruited for this study. Five patients (17.9%) in the WCSD group and only one patient (3.6%) in NWCSD group had surgical site infection (p = 0.20). Four patients (14.3%) in the WCSD group and nine (32.1%) in NWCSD group had wound dressing reinforcements (p = 0.21).
conclusionThere was generally no statistically significant difference in the incidence of wound infections, strike through bloodstain with wound dressing reinforcement and duration of hospital stay in patients with and without closed suction wound drainage after ORIF of femoral shaft fractures. The duration of the injury may however influence the decision to use or not use wound drain after surgery.
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.