Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34527801›Full record

ArticleArthroplasty today2021

Multilayer Watertight Closure to Address Adverse Events From Primary Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Wound Closure Methods by Tissue Layer.

Mark A Snyder, Brian P Chen, Andrew Hogan, George W J Wright

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroplasty today, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mark A SnyderOrthopaedic Center of Excellence, Good Samaritan Hospital, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Brian P ChenHealth Economics and Market Access, Ethicon, Inc, A Johnson & Johnson Company, Somerville, NJ, USA.
Andrew HoganValue & Evidence Services, CRG-EVERSANA Canada Inc, Burlington, Ontario, Canada.
George W J WrightValue & Evidence Services, CRG-EVERSANA Canada Inc, Burlington, Ontario, Canada.
EVERSANA (Canada) · CAGood Samaritan Hospital · USJohnson & Johnson (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWound closure is a key, and often underrecognized, component of hip and knee arthroplasty. Methods for wound closure are an important consideration to better avoid wound-related adverse events; however, there is a lack of consensus on optimal methods. The objective of the following review was twofold: to characterize the wound closure methods used by layer in the total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty literature and summarize optimal wound-healing strategies to address the risk of adverse events.

methodsA systematic literature review was performed to identify total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies reporting wound closure methods by layer and wound-healing adverse events (including superficial, deep, or periprosthetic joint infections, wound dehiscence, or prolonged wound drainage). Studies on revision procedures were excluded. Wound closure methods and adverse events were summarized qualitatively as meta-analyses were not possible because of study heterogeneity.

resultsForty studies met the inclusion criteria: 22 randomized controlled trials and 18 observational studies. Across studies, 6 categories and 22 unique techniques for closure were identified. Conventional closure methods exhibited large ranges of adverse event rates. Studies of multilayer barbed sutures with topical skin adhesives and polyester mesh or multilayer antimicrobial sutures reported narrow ranges of adverse events rates.

conclusionsConsiderable variability exists for wound closure methods, with a wide range reported in adverse events. Recent technologies and methods for standardized watertight, multilayer closure show promise for avoiding adverse events and unnecessary health-care costs; however, higher quality, comparative studies are required to enable future meta-analyses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

Surgical site infectionsSystematic reviewTotal hip arthroplastyTotal knee arthroplastyWound closure

Identifiers

PMID34527801
PMCPMC8430424
OpenAlexW3178510466

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.