SynthesisInternational wound journal2020
A novel zipper device versus sutures for wound closure after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel zipper device versus sutures for wound closure after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2020Pooled it
- Postoperative Mechanomodulation Decreases T-Junction Dehiscence After Reduction Mammaplasty: Early Scar Analysis From a Randomized Controlled Trial.Aesthetic surgery journal · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of microMend wound closure device in repairing skin lacerations.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2023Trial
- A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Comparison of Adhesive Wound Closure Devices in an Orthopaedic Patient.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2022Trial
- Noninvasive Skin Closure Device (DermaClip®) vs Conventional Sutures: A Randomized Crossover Trial on Cadaver Models.Cureus · 2026Article
- Zip Stitch Adhesive Bandage for Maxillofacial Wounds - An Evaluative Study.Annals of maxillofacial surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We performed an updated meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of the zipper device and sutures for wound closure after surgery. A computerised literature search was performed for published trials in PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Two reviewers independently scrutinised the trials, extracted data, and assessed the quality of trials. The primary outcome was surgical site infections (SSI). The secondary outcomes were wound dehiscence, total wound complications, wound closure time, and scar score. Statistical analysis was performed in the Stata 12.0. Of the 130 citations, eight trials (1207 participants) met eligibility criteria and were included. The zipper device achieved a lower SSI rate (RR: 0.63, [95% CI: 0.41-0.96, P = 0.032]), a shorter wound closure time (SMD: -8.53 [95% CI: -11.93 to -5.13, P = 0.000]) and a better scar score (SMD: 0.42 [95% CI: 0.22-0.62, P = 0.000]) than sutures. No significant difference was shown in the incidence of wound dehiscence and total wound complications. Therefore, the zipper device provides the advantages of anti-infection, time-saving, and cosmesis for wound closure.
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.