ArticleCureus2023
A Comparative Study of Continuous Versus Interrupted Suturing Technique in Creating a Vascular Access for Hemodialysis: An Institutional-Based Experience.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are considered the first and best access for patients with end-stage renal disease who need permanent vascular access for hemodialysis over arteriovenous grafts and central venous catheters for reasons that have been well-established. Poor early patency rates pose the biggest challenge in creating vascular access as they cause increased morbidity and economic/psychological concerns among patients. To minimize such effects, it is critical to use a patient-centered approach and carefully choose patients for AVF access creation. This study aimed to compare the primary patency of distal vascular access provided by continuous suturing versus that provided by interrupted suturing. Methodology This prospective study was conducted in the urology department of a superspecialty, tertiary care center from November 2021 to November 2022. Patency was assessed immediately after surgery (on the table), one month later, and six months later by palpating thrill and auscultating bruit. A total of 50 patients between the ages of 18 and 70 years who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to two groups of 25 each. Results The baseline characteristics of both groups were comparable. At six months (p = 0.09), the continuous suturing group was observed to be somewhat better than the interrupted suturing group, with no significant difference in immediate and one-month patency rates. When compared to the continuous suturing group, the primary patency failure rate was significantly higher in the interrupted suturing group. Conclusions Thus, under appropriate circumstances, continuous sutures can be performed with greater ease, resulting in anastomosis that is as patent as that performed with interrupted sutures.
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.