Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40390946›Full record

ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2025

Comparison of Three Techniques for Skin Closure in Caesarean Delivery (Absorbable Subcuticular Sutures, Non-absorbable Nylon Sutures, Surgical Staplers): A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Shreya S Kushwaha, Seema Singhal, Soniya Dhiman, Sunesh Kumar, Kallol K Roy, Jyoti Meena, Swati Tomar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Shreya S KushwahaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.
Seema SinghalDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.
Soniya DhimanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.
Sunesh KumarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.
Kallol K RoyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.
Jyoti MeenaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.
Swati TomarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029 India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Caesarean section is associated with post-operative surgical complications such as wound disruption, induration and hematoma. It is essential to optimize surgical techniques to ensure the best possible outcomes for women undergoing caesarean section. Methods: This was a randomized controlled trial done at a tertiary care centre. A total of 300 women undergoing first caesarean section were randomly allocated to absorbable subcuticular sutures ( Results: Significantly more women developed wound dehiscence in the stapler group ( Conclusion: Present study suggests a benefit with sutures compared to surgical staplers in terms of wound dehiscence, infection, cosmesis and patient's satisfaction. Among the methods of skin closure, absorbable subcuticular monocryl and non-absorbable nylon sutures have similar outcomes with marginal benefit in absorbable subcuticular monocryl sutures.

Indexed as

Absorbable subcuticular sutureCaesarean sectionNon-absorbable interrupted sutureSurgical staplerWound dehiscence

Identifiers

PMID40390946
PMCPMC12085474

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.