Trial reportWorld journal of surgery2020
Simple Wound Irrigation in the Postoperative Treatment for Surgically Drained Spontaneous Soft Tissue Abscesses: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in World journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Health-Related Quality-of-Life Measurement in Patients With Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Pooled it
- Purulent Skin and Soft Tissue Infections, Challenging the Practice of Incision and Drainage: A Scoping Review.Nursing research and practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSoft tissue abscesses are among the most frequently encountered medical problems treated by different surgeons. Standard therapy remains incision and drainage with sterile saline irrigation during postoperative wound healing period. Aim of this prospective randomized controlled trial was to compare sterile irrigation versus nonsterile irrigation. STUDY
designA single center randomized controlled trial was performed to investigate postoperative wound irrigation. The control group used sterile irrigation, and the intervention group used nonsterile irrigation. Primary endpoints were reinfection and reintervention rates, assessed during follow-up controls for up to 2 years. Secondary endpoints were the duration of wound healing, inability to work, pain and quality of life.
resultsBetween 04/2016 and 05/2017, 118 patients were randomized into two groups, with 61 allocated to the control- and 57 to the intervention group. Reinfection occurred in a total of 4 cases (6.6%) in the sterile protocol and 4 (7%) in the nonsterile protocol. Quality of life and pain values were comparable during the wound healing period, and patients treated according to the nonsterile irrigation protocol used significantly fewer wound care service teams. Despite equal wound persistence rates, a substantially shorter amount of time off from work was reported in the nonsterile protocol group (p value 0.086).
conclusionThis prospective, randomized trial indicates that a nonsterile irrigation protocol for patients operated on for soft tissue abscesses is not inferior to the standard sterile protocol. Moreover, a nonsterile irrigation protocol leads to a shorter period of inability to work with comparable pain and quality of life scores during the wound healing period.
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.