SynthesisInternational wound journal2024
Effect of salpingectomy versus tubal ligation on postoperative wound infection in patients: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of salpingectomy versus tubal ligation on postoperative wound infection in patients: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- RETRACTION: Effect of Salpingectomy Versus Tubal Ligation on Postoperative Wound Infection in Patients: A Meta-Analysis.International wound journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After several institutions recommended salpingectomy as opposed to tubal ligation, we attempted to perform meta-analysis to compare operative properties and rates of postoperative wound infections. There are no temporal or linguistic limitations to our search in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase. The search was carried out in September 2023. The database search identified 401 potential studies and five studies were included in the meta-analysis. Our study involved a comparison of salpingectomy with tube ligating in female patients who wanted to be sterilized. Our trial included at least one result of the wound and haemorrhage. The articles that did not qualify for inclusion or did not submit data, and those who did not answer questions were excluded. Abstracts and full-text articles were assessed independently by two authors using blinding. Conflicting decisions were settled by consensus. The Cochrane-recommended ROBINS-I instrument has been applied to evaluate the risk of bias in clinical trials and to establish the quality of inclusion. Two authors separately evaluated the risk of bias for each trial; differences were settled by consensus. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of postoperative wound infections among those who had received salpingectomy or tubal ligation (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.18-1.20 p = 0.11). In the three trials, the risk of bleeding following the ligation of the fallopian tubes was lower than that of the salpingectomy group (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.21-1.30 p < 0.0001). From this information we have come to the conclusion that it is possible to give preference to tubal ligation for reduction of bleeding in suitable circumstances, and that the findings currently do not provide sufficient evidence for a reduction in the risk of postoperative wound infection.
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.