SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024
Wound closure techniques for spinoplastic surgery: a review of the literature.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe approach to skin closure in spinal surgery is dependent on surgeon preference and experience. Wound complications, including dehiscence and surgical site infection (SSI), are common following spine surgery. The authors reviewed various wound closure techniques employed in spinal surgery.
methodsA systematic review was conducted to identify articles comparing wound closure techniques after posterior spinal surgery. Articles that employed experimental or observational cohort study designs and reported rates of SSI, dehiscence, or scarring following spinal surgery were included.
resultsEight studies examining closure techniques of the skin were identified: five retrospective cohort studies and three randomized-controlled trials. No differences in the incidence of SSI were reported based on suture technique, although staples were associated with higher SSI rates in single level spinal fusion, and barbed suture resulted in decreased wound complications. The use of intracutaneous sutures was associated with a higher incidence of wound dehiscence when compared to tension-relieving far-near near-far suture (FNS) and far-near near-far interrupted point (FNP) sutures. However, the latter two also resulted in the highest rates of delayed wound healing (i.e., time to fully heal). Modified Allgöwer-Donati suture (MADS) resulted in smaller scar area when compared to vertical mattress suture.
conclusionSignificant differences exist in wound healing when comparing suture techniques in spinal surgery. Surgical staples allow for faster closing time, but are also associated with higher wound complications. Intracutaneous sutures appear to have higher rates of dehiscence compared to vertical mattress suture but display faster wound healing. Future studies are necessary to elucidate contributory factors, including local ischemia and changes in tensile forces. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39174840What 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.