Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38649486›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2024

Barbed versus conventional suture in elective posterior spine surgery.

Pedro David Delgado-López, Javier Martín-Alonso, Ana Isabel Herrero-Gutiérrez, Vicente Martín-Velasco, José Manuel Castilla-Díez, Antonio Montalvo-Afonso, Rubén Diana-Martín, Eva María Pérez-Cabo

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pedro David Delgado-LópezNeurosurgery Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Avda Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain. pedrodl@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9317-6958
Javier Martín-AlonsoNeurosurgery Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Avda Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain.
Ana Isabel Herrero-GutiérrezNeurosurgery Nursing Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Burgos, Spain.
Vicente Martín-VelascoNeurosurgery Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Avda Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain.
José Manuel Castilla-DíezNeurosurgery Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Avda Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain.
Antonio Montalvo-AfonsoNeurosurgery Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Avda Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2440-3237
Rubén Diana-MartínNeurosurgery Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Avda Islas Baleares 3, 09006, Burgos, Spain.
Eva María Pérez-CaboIntensive Care Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Burgos, Spain.
Hospital Universitario de Burgos · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBarbed sutures are tissue control devices that can reduce operating room time and costs. We analyzed the utility of barbed sutures in posterior spinal surgery in order to prove non-inferiority to conventional methods for wound closure.

methodsA cohort of patients undergoing elective posterior spinal surgery in which barbed (prospective) versus conventional sutures (retrospective) were used was analyzed. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of wound healing complications or the need for surgical revision. Secondary endpoints included postoperative stay, readmission rate, and duration and cost of wound closure.

resultA total of 483 patients participated in the study, 183 in the Barbed group and 300 in the Conventional group. Wound dehiscence or seroma occurred in 3.8% and 2.7% of the Barbed and Conventional groups, respectively (p = 0.6588). Both superficial (1.6% versus 4.0%, P = 0.2378) and deep infections (2.7% versus 4.7%, p = 0.4124) occurred similarly in both groups. Overall, the rate of re-intervention due to wound healing problems was also similar (4.9% versus 5.3%, p = 0.9906), as well as, total median hospital stay, postoperative stay and 30-day re-admission rates. The average duration of wound closure (1.66 versus 4.16 min per level operated, p < 0.0001) strongly favored the Barbed group. The mean cost of wound closure per patient was higher in the Barbed group (43.23 € versus 22.67 €, p < 0.0001).

conclusionsIn elective posterior spinal procedures, the use of barbed sutures significantly reduced the duration of wound closure. The wound healing process was not hindered and the added cost related to the suture material was small.

Indexed as

Elective Surgical ProceduresSuturesSuture TechniquesAdultAgedFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSpineWound HealingBarbed sutureElective surgerySpineSurgical site infectionWound dehiscence

Identifiers

PMID38649486
OpenAlexW4394997397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.