Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31487852›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Bacterial Adherence Around Sutures of Different Material at Grafted Site: A Microbiological Analysis.

Lanka Mahesh, Varun Raj Kumar, Anshi Jain, Sagrika Shukla, Juan Manuel Aragoneses, José María Martínez González, Manuel Fernández-Domínguez, José Luis Calvo-Guirado

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Lanka MaheshPrivate Practice, New Delhi 110001, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0672-9639
Varun Raj KumarPrivate Practice, New Delhi 110001, India.
Anshi JainDepartment of Oral Pathology, ITS Dental College, Ghaziabad 201009, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Sagrika ShuklaPrivate Practice in Periodontology, New Delhi 110001, India.
Juan Manuel AragonesesDepartment of Dental Research in Universidad Federico Henríquez y Carvajal (UFHEC), Santo Domingo 10107, Dominican Republic.
José María Martínez GonzálezDepartment Oral Surgery, University Complutense of Madrid, 28223 Madrid, Spain. hospimar@hotmail.com.
Manuel Fernández-DomínguezDepartment of Oral Surgery and Implantology and Director of Research in Dentistry in the Doctoral Program of Translational Medicine, CEU San Pablo University, 28223 Madrid, Spain.
José Luis Calvo-GuiradoDepartment of Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Católica de Murcia, UCAM, 30107 Murcia, Spain. jlcalvo@ucam.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4067-2253

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Closure of the surgical incision has been the primary function of sutures since their introduction. However, whatever the type, they are known to carry bacteria, which can be a source of infection. Five types of surgical sutures, Gut, Silk, Vicryl, PTFE, and Polyamide, were selected and tested on their ability to carry aerobic and anaerobic bacteria and were rated on the basis of forming colony-forming units (CFUs). Aerobic bacteria grown around gut sutures showed minimum CFUs (≈30 × 10

Indexed as

dental suturesgutpolyamidePTFEsilkVicryl

Identifiers

PMID31487852
PMCPMC6765980

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.