ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Comparison of complications and surgery outcomes in skin closure methods following cesarean sections.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. 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.
- Comparing Antibiotic Regimens for Preventing Infections After Planned Cesarean Delivery.O&G open · 2025Article
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
purposeThis study aimed to assess the impact of absorbable subcutaneous staples for skin closure in cesarean delivery (CD) on maternal morbidity.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary university-affiliated medical center between January 2011 and April 2022. In 2020, a new technique involving absorbable subcutaneous staples for skin closure in CD was introduced. We compared surgical outcomes among three groups: non-absorbable staples, absorbable subcutaneous staples, and absorbable subcutaneous sutures. Data were compared between the three groups and demographic, obstetric, and surgical characteristics were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis.
resultsDuring the study period, 31,660 CDs were performed in our center. The data of 31,419 CDs were available for analysis. Absorbable subcutaneous staples were associated with a significantly shorter surgery time in comparison to non-absorbable staples and sutures (52 min vs 53 min vs 60 min, p < 0.001). No differences were found in rates of wound infections or any surgical site surgery in the 45 days following CD. In a multivariate analysis: the use of absorbable subcutaneous staples was associated with a significantly lower risk for prolonged hospitalization > 5 days (OR 0.6, p < 0.001) and re-admission within 45 days (OR 0.8, p = 0.04).
conclusionThe use of absorbable subcutaneous staples for skin closure during CD is associated with shorter surgery times and a lower risk of prolonged hospitalization and readmission within 45 days.
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.