Trial reportOrthopaedic surgery2022
Effect of Modified Allgöwer-Donati Suture Technique on Wound Cosmetics in Spinal Surgery.
Trial report in Orthopaedic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A meta-analysis of Allgöwer-Donati versus interrupted vertical mattress suturing in preventing postoperative incisional complications of calcaneal fracture surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Wound closure techniques for spinoplastic surgery: a review of the literature.Neurosurgical review · 2024Pooled it
- Observation on the efficacy of skin closure by skin staplers in extended L-shaped incisions for calcaneal fractures.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Trial
- [Application of Allgöwer-Donati suture in internal fixation of Schatzker typeZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the efficacy of modified Allgöwer-Donati suture (MADS) technique on cosmetic outcomes compared with vertical mattress suture (VMS) technique in spinal surgery wounds.
methodsThis randomized controlled trial was conducted at the First Hospital of Lanzhou University (Gansu, China) from September 2019 to August 2020. The patients were randomly divided into two groups, a VMS group and a MADS group, by staff not involved in the treatment using a computer-based random number table program (no restrictions on age or sex). Both procedures were performed by the same group of physicians as well as assistants. All suture wounds were completed by the same person. The primary endpoint was the scar area, and the postoperative scar area was scored by the Patient and Observer Scar Scale Assessment (POSAS). The scar area was calculated by ImageJ software. The second outcome measure was wound complications, including poor wound healing, wound edge necrosis, and infection. The trial was recorded in the Chinese Clinical Trial Register on 18 August 2019 (ChiCTR1900024548).
resultsA total of 143 patients were included: 72 in the VMS group and 71 in the MADS group. There was no significant difference in their demographics in terms of age (49.71 ± 8.91 vs 50.15 ± 6.79 years, P = 0.737), sex (M/F, 30/41 vs 31/41, P = 0.923), suture time (3.39 ± 0.22 vs 3.47 ± 0.25 s/mm, P = 0.057), or body mass index (BMI, 23.88 ± 3.50 vs 24.05 ± 3.50, P = 0.765) for MADS to VMS. The postoperative scar area was compared between the two groups transversely on day 12, the MADS wound scars decreased by 58.95% (75,133.24/127,452.58). In the POSAS evaluation, after MADS treatment, surface area score decreased from 5 (4, 5) to 2 (2, 3) (P < 0.0001), observer's overall opinion from 5 (4, 5) to 3 (2, 3) (P < 0.0001), itching from 3 (3, 4) to 3 (2, 3) (P = 0.001), color from 4 (4, 5) to 3 (2-4) (P < 0.0001), stiffness 4 (3-4.75) to 3 (3, 4) (P < 0.0001), or thickness from 4 (3-5) to 4 (3, 4) (P = 0.004). In terms of overall opinion evaluation, the MADS showed a significant difference in observer's overall opinion to the VMS (5 (4, 5) vs 3 (2, 3), P < 0.0001) and in patient's overall opinion 5 (5, 6) to 3 (3, 4), (P < 0.0001). There was no significant statistical difference in poor wound healing (3 vs 0, P = 0.245), wound edge necrosis (3 vs 0, P = 0.245), and infection (1 vs 0, P = 1.000) with the MADS to the VMS.
conclusionThe results of this study show that the MADS effectively reduced the surgical scar area to 58.95% with no additional adverse events compared with that of the VMS in spine surgery.
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.