Trial reportWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2025
Impact of different skin suturing methods on patient prognosis after ileostomy closure.
Trial report in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAt present, prophylactic ileostomy is commonly used to protect distal intestinal anastomoses, particularly during the recovery period following colorectal surgery. However, after the ileum is returned to the abdominal cavity, abdominal closure using traditional vertical interrupted suturing is associated with a higher incidence of wound infections. For patients undergoing ileostomy closure, selecting an appropriate suturing method for the skin incision at the stoma site is crucial for improving patient prognosis.
aimTo investigate the impact of three different skin suturing methods at the ileostomy closure site on patient prognosis.
methodsThirty patients who underwent ileostomy closure at the Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University between January 2024 and October 2024 were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The patients were divided into three groups: The purse-string suture group, the cross-suture group, and the vertical interrupted suture group, with 10 cases in each group. The purse-string suture group, cross-suture group, and vertical interrupted suture group used purse-string, cross, and vertical interrupted suturing methods, respectively, for the skin incision at the ileostomy closure site.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences among the three groups in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, time to resume liquid diet, time to first bowel movement, postoperative hospital stay, hospitalization costs, or levels of white blood cell count, hemoglobin, and albumin on the third postoperative day (
conclusionUsing purse-string or cross-suturing methods for skin incision at the ileostomy closure site can shorten wound healing and suture removal times, reduce surgical site infection incidence and postoperative inflammatory response, alleviate incision pain, and promote rapid postoperative recovery.
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.