Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33945574›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Subcuticular sutures versus staples for skin closure in patients undergoing abdominal surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Juntao Feng, Xiaoli Jiang, Zhifu Zhi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Juntao FengDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-2170-2832
Xiaoli JiangDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Zhifu ZhiDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Guangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical site infections (SSIs) are common postoperative complications. Whether the use of staples or sutures makes a difference in abdominal surgery's infection rate remains elusive.

methodsA systematic review was performed to identify randomized clinical trials comparing staples and sutures after abdominal surgeries. Eligibility criteria involved the SSI occurrence as the primary outcome and the incidence of wound dehiscence, closure time, cosmesis, and patient satisfaction as the secondary outcomes.

resultsOf the 278 studies identified, seven randomized controlled trials representing 3705 patients were included in this review. There was no significant difference in SSI rates between sutures and staples in general (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.79-1.22, I2 = 44%, P = 0.1) or in a subgroup of gastrointestinal surgery, where subcuticular suturing was found with a comparable SSI risk with skin stapling (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66-1.09). Staple closure was associated with a shorter surgery duration, whereas sutures appeared to provide better cosmesis and patient satisfaction. Sutures and staples achieved a comparable incidence of dehiscence. There was no significant between-study publication bias.

conclusionOur study demonstrated similar outcomes in SSI rate between subcuticular sutures and staples for skin closure in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Indexed as

AbdomenDigestive System Surgical ProceduresHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSkinSurgical StaplingSurgical Wound InfectionSuturesSuture Techniques

Identifiers

PMID33945574
PMCPMC8096075
OpenAlexW3157256510

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.