Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38127141›Full record

SynthesisArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024

Efficacy and safety of V-Loc

Juliane Hafermann, Ubong Silas, Rhodri Saunders

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Juliane HafermannCoreva Scientific GmbH & Co KG, Im Muehlenbruch 1, 53639, Koenigswinter, Germany. ourpublications@coreva-scientific.com.ORCID 0009-0004-4595-7794
Ubong SilasCoreva Scientific GmbH & Co KG, Im Muehlenbruch 1, 53639, Koenigswinter, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6922-6599
Rhodri SaundersCoreva Scientific GmbH & Co KG, Im Muehlenbruch 1, 53639, Koenigswinter, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1463-4656
Postnova Analytics (Germany) · DEScientific Research and Development (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOne of the most challenging tasks in laparoscopic gynecological surgeries is suturing. Knotless barbed sutures are intended to enable faster suturing and hemostasis. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of V-Loc

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for studies published between 2010 and September 2021 comparing VBS to CS for OB/GYN procedures. All comparative studies were included. Primary analysis and subgroup analyses for the different surgery and suturing types were performed. Primary outcomes were operation time and suture time; secondary outcomes included post-operative complications, surgical site infections, estimated blood loss, length of stay, granulation tissue formation, and surgical difficulty. Results were calculated as weighted mean difference (WMD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with a random effects model, and a sensitivity analysis for study quality, study size, and outlier results was performed. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022363187.

resultsIn total, 25 studies involving 4452 women undergoing hysterectomy, myomectomy, or excision of endometrioma. VBS were associated with a reduction in operation time (WMD - 17.08 min; 95% CI - 21.57, - 12.59), suture time (WMD - 5.39 min; 95% CI - 7.06, - 3.71), surgical site infection (RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.09, 0.78), estimated blood loss (WMD - 44.91 ml; 95% CI - 66.01, - 23.81), granulation tissue formation (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25, 0.89), and surgical difficulty (WMD - 1.98 VAS score; 95% CI - 2.83, - 1.13). No difference between VBS and CS was found regarding total postoperative complications or length of stay. Many of the outcomes showed high heterogeneity, likely due to the inclusion of different surgery types and comparators. Most results were shown to be robust in the sensitivity analysis except for the reduction in granulation tissue formation.

conclusionThis meta-analysis indicates that V-Loc

Indexed as

Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresSurgical Wound InfectionSuture TechniquesBlood Loss, SurgicalFemaleHumansHysterectomyLaparoscopyLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsSuturesUterine MyomectomyBarbed sutureHysterectomyMeta-analysisMyomectomyV-Loc

Identifiers

PMID38127141
PMCPMC10894094
OpenAlexW4390056870

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.