Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38569644›Full record

ArticleNeurospine2024

Surgeon Preference Regarding Wound Dressing Management in Lumbar Fusion Surgery: An AO Spine Global Cross-Sectional Study.

Luca Ambrosio, Gianluca Vadalà, Javad Tavakoli, Laura Scaramuzzo, Giovanni Barbanti Brodano, Stephen J Lewis, So Kato, Samuel K Cho, S Tim Yoon, Ho-Joong Kim and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurospine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

12 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Luca AmbrosioOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Gianluca VadalàOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Javad TavakoliSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Laura ScaramuzzoSpine Surgery Division 1, IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio, Milan, Italy.
Giovanni Barbanti BrodanoDepartment of Spine Surgery, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Stephen J LewisUHN-Orthopedics, University of Toronto, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
So KatoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Samuel K ChoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
S Tim YoonDepartment of Orthopaedics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Ho-Joong KimSpine Center and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea.
Matthew F GaryDepartments of Neurosurgery and Orthopaedic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Vincenzo DenaroOperative Research Unit of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Emory University · USUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · ITCampus Bio Medico University Hospital · ITIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USIstituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITSeoul National University Bundang Hospital · KRUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUUniversity of Tokyo Hospital · JPUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions.

methodsA survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons' preferences were analyzed.

resultsRight following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001).

conclusionMost spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.

Indexed as

DressingIntervertebral disc degenerationMinimally invasive spine surgerySpine fusionSurgical site infectionSurvey

Identifiers

PMID38569644
PMCPMC10992664
OpenAlexW4393249967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.