Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32266018›Full record

ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2020

Comparison of early and delayed removal of dressing following primary closure of clean and contaminated surgical wounds: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Taijuan Zhang, Fujie Zhang, Zongnan Chen, Xiuling Cheng

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05458518 (A Randomised Controlled Trial on the Timing of Wound Dressing Removal After Emergency Caesarean Delivery), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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.

NCT05458518 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Randomised Controlled Trial on the Timing of Wound Dressing Removal After Emergency Caesarean Delivery

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital KemamanRan2022 to 2024Enrolled294ConditionsSurgical Wound, Surgical Wound Infection, Cesarean Section ComplicationsArmsCesarean wound dressing removal
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A network meta-analysis of the timing of wound dressing removal.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. 'No Dressing' Strategy for Post-operative Orthopaedic Cases.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Taijuan ZhangWound Treatment Center, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China.
Fujie ZhangWound Treatment Center, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China.
Zongnan ChenDepartment of General Surgery, Tianjin Fifth Central Hospital, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China.
Xiuling ChengDepartment of Nursing, Tianjin Fifth Central Hospital, Tianjin 300450, P.R. China.
Fifth Tianjin Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The usefulness of dressing a surgical wound beyond the first 24-48 h of surgery is currently a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the early and delayed removal of dressing following primary closure in the management of clean and contaminated surgical wounds. Systematic searches were conducted in various databases including Medline, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and Embase from January, 1964 until October, 2019. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess the quality of published trials. We carried out a meta-analysis with random-effects model and reported pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In total, we analysed 10 studies with 1,708 participants. All the studies were randomized controlled trials, while the majority of studies had unclear or high bias risks. Early dressing removal was favoured with respect to surgical site infection (pooled RR=0.89; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.29), patient's perception on safety (pooled RR=0.60; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.76) and comfort (pooled RR=0.95; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.22), while the remaining outcomes favoured delayed dressing removal. However, none of the factors had statistically significant difference between two interventions except the patient's perception on safety. To summarize, delayed removal of dressing is not superior to early removal following primary closure of clean or clean-contaminated surgical wounds.

Indexed as

occlusive dressingssurgical woundwound closure techniqueswounds and injuries

Identifiers

PMID32266018
PMCPMC7132221
OpenAlexW3011912127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.