ArticleTrials2023
The effect on incisional hernia of absorbable barbed suture for midline fascial closure in minimally invasive surgery for colorectal and gastric cancers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Trials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Barbed continuous suture reduces the risk of specimen extraction site hernia in high-risk obese patients: a CT-based analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Incisional hernia after continuous barbed versus interrupted non-barbed sutures for midline fascial closure in minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- The current role of barbed sutures in fascial closure of ventral hernia repair: a multicenter study using the abdominal core health quality collaborative database.Surgical endoscopy · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncisional hernia following abdominal surgery is a frequent complication of midline laparotomy. This complication is strongly associated with the technique and material used for suture. While a monofilament absorbable suture is recommended to prevent incisional hernia, it can lead to suture loosening or surgical-knot breakage. Although barbed sutures can be an alternative suture material in abdominal fascial closure, evidence for its safety and effectiveness is lacking. Therefore, we designed a prospective randomized trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of absorbable barbed sutures for midline fascia closure in minimally invasive surgery for colorectal and gastric cancers in comparison with conventional absorbable monofilament sutures.
methodsA total of 312 patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery for colorectal and gastric cancers will be randomly allocated to either the absorbable barbed or monofilament suture group for abdominal fascia closure in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is incisional hernia rate within 3 years after surgery, as verified by physical examination and computed tomography. Postoperative complications, including surgical site infection, postoperative pain, and quality of life, will be compared between two groups as secondary outcomes. The investigator will examine the patients until discharge and at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized controlled trial to compare absorbable barbed sutures with monofilament sutures for midline fascia closure in minimally invasive surgery. If absorbable barbed sutures demonstrate superior results to those of monofilament sutures, this type of suture material may be recommended as an alternative option for abdominal fascia closure.
trial registrationKCT0007069. Registered on January 30, 2023.
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.