SynthesisArchives of dermatological research2024
Fast absorbing gut sutures in dermatologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Archives of dermatological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Suture Materials: Conventional and Stimulatory-Responsive Absorbable Polymers with Biomimetic Function.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFast gut cutaneous sutures have become more prominent due to their low tissue reactivity, rapid absorption, and elimination of suture removal visits. It is not known how fast gut sutures compare to other closure modalities.
methodsA comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing fast gut sutures to alternative closure methods during dermatologic surgery. Data collected included patient and physician assessed cosmetic outcome as well as standardized complication rates.
resultsSix studies were included in final analysis and reported on 208 patients. Fast gut sutures were associated with lower physician opinions of final scar when compared to polypropylene sutures (SMD 0.438; 95% CI 0.082 to 0.794). No differences existed between physician opinion of fast gut sutures and cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (SMD - 0.024; 95% CI - 0.605 to 0.556). Complications with fast gut suture placement were rare, and included infection, dehiscence, and hematomas. Fast gut sutures were less likely to experience wound dehiscence than tissue adhesive (p = 0.01).
conclusionIf no contraindications to polypropylene sutures exist, they may provide superior cosmetic outcomes compared to fast gut sutures. Further research is required to better quantify cosmetic outcomes and optimal use of fast gut sutures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38850366What 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.