Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36381800›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Using Absorbable Sutures for Traumatic Wound Closure to Avoid Additional Hospital Visits for Suture Removal During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Ahmed F Alkandari, Diaa M Soliman, Sampath Madhyastha, Abrar A Alawadhi, Fatma A Alawadhi, Nawaf M Almotairi, Ous Alozairi

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trigger Finger Release: Are Sutures Requiring Removal Necessary?Journal of hand surgery global online · 2023
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ahmed F AlkandariDepartment of Surgery, Al-Adan Hospital, Ahmadi, KWT.
Diaa M SolimanDepartment of Surgery, Al-Adan Hospital, Ahmadi, KWT.
Sampath MadhyasthaDepartment of Anatomy, Kuwait University, Jabriya, KWT.
Abrar A AlawadhiDepartment of Surgery, Al-Adan Hospital, Ahmadi, KWT.
Fatma A AlawadhiDepartment of Surgery, Al-Adan Hospital, Ahmadi, KWT.
Nawaf M AlmotairiDepartment of Surgery, Al-Adan Hospital, Ahmadi, KWT.
Ous AlozairiDepartment of Surgery, Al-Adan Hospital, Ahmadi, KWT.
Adan Hospital · KWKuwait University · KW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic worldwide forced governments to undertake intervention measures to encourage social distancing. Meanwhile, traumatic skin lacerations require multiple hospital visits for dressing changing and suture removal since they are usually repaired with non-absorbable sutures. These visits can be avoided by using absorbable sutures instead. However, absorbable sutures carry the "potential" risk of wound infection. In the current study, our first objective was to determine the non-inferiority of absorbable sutures regarding infection rate after repairing traumatic wound lacerations in comparison to the conventional non-absorbable ones. Our second objective was to evaluate the superiority of absorbable sutures in regard to postoperative clinic visits for suture removal and wound dressing compared to the non-absorbable ones. Methods A sample of 471 patients with traumatic skin lacerations was analyzed during the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020. In the control group, wounds were repaired using non-absorbable sutures, while rapid-onset absorbable sutures were used in the treatment group. By conducting a phone/video call follow-up after 21 days, several parameters regarding infection signs and clinic visits were compared between both groups. Results A significant decrease in total trauma patients (45.4%) and those who required suturing (51.2%) was observed in April 2020 compared to the same month of the previous four years (p = 0.001 (2016), p = 0.027 (2017), p = 0.027 (2018), and p = 0.001 (2019)). Regarding wound infection, no statistically significant difference (p = 0.623) was observed between the absorbable (3.2%) and non-absorbable (4.9%) groups. Using absorbable sutures resulted in significantly (p < 0.001) fewer postoperative hospital visits compared to using non-absorbable sutures (mean: one versus three visits). Conclusion Using absorbable sutures to repair traumatic wound lacerations is safe regarding wound healing and infection rates. They also reduce postoperative hospital visits since they are not intended to be removed. Therefore, they should be considered during a pandemic to reduce hospital visits for suture removal, which will subsequently enhance social distancing and relieve hospital load.

Indexed as

absorbable suturescovid-19 pandemichospital loadnon-absorbable suturesprolene suturesocial distancingsuture removaltraumatic woundsvicryl suturewound infection

Identifiers

PMID36381800
PMCPMC9637447
OpenAlexW4303045349

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.