SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2021
Prophylactic subcutaneous drainage reduces post-operative incisional infections in colorectal surgeries: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Subcutaneous Negative Suction Drain on Surgical Site Infection Following Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.ANZ journal of surgeryPooled it
- Incision pressing, a simple and effective intervention to reduce colorectal surgical site infection: A propensity score-matched study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Letter to the Editor regarding "Prophylactic subcutaneous drainage reduces post-operative incisional infections in colorectal surgeries: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials".International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- Modified Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Increases Seroma Evacuation: AnBioMed research international · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDue to lack of high-level evidences, prophylactic subcutaneous drainage has so far not been recommended in relevant guidelines as a countermeasure against incisional infections. This meta-analysis aims to clarify the efficacy of subcutaneous drainage in reducing incisional infections in colorectal surgeries.
methodsCochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the incidence rate of incisional infections between patients receiving prophylactic subcutaneous drainage (interventions) and those not receiving (controls) after digestive surgeries. Results from included RCTs were pooled multiple times according to different surgical types. Heterogeneity, publication bias, and certainty of evidences were estimated.
resultsEight randomized controlled trials were included. Three RCTs each included patients receiving all sorts of digestive surgeries (gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, and pancreatic); pooled incisional infection rates between the drainage group and the control group were not significantly different (RR = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.48-1.21, p = 0.25). Four RCTs included patients receiving colorectal surgeries; pooled incisional infection rate in the drainage group was significantly lower than that in the control group (RR = 0.34, 95%CI: 0.19-0.61, p = 0.0004). Four RCTs included patients receiving upper GI and/or HBP surgeries; pooled incisional infection rates in the drainage group and the non-drainage group were not significantly different (RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.54-1.34, p = 0.49).
conclusionsProphylactic subcutaneous drainage significantly reduces post-operative incisional infections in colorectal surgeries but was not efficacious in digestive surgeries in general.
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.