Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41486907›Full record

ReviewAnnals of coloproctology2025

Comparison of purse-string technique versus linear suture for skin closure after stoma reversal: a meta-analysis of high-quality studies.

Filippo Carannante, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Gianluca Costa, Valentina Miacci, Gianfranco Bianco, Vincenzo Schiavone, Jim S Khan, Marco Caricato, Gabriella Teresa Capolupo

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of coloproctology, 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

9 authors.

Filippo CarannanteColorectal Surgery Clinical and Research Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Guglielmo Niccolò PiozziDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Gianluca CostaColorectal Surgery Clinical and Research Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Valentina MiacciColorectal Surgery Clinical and Research Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Gianfranco BiancoDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Science, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Vincenzo SchiavoneDivision of General Surgery, Department of Life Sciences, Health and Health Professions, Link Campus University, Rome, Italy.
Jim S KhanDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Marco CaricatoColorectal Surgery Clinical and Research Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Gabriella Teresa CapolupoColorectal Surgery Clinical and Research Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeStoma reversal is associated with notable postoperative morbidity. Several techniques exist for skin closure after stoma reversal, with linear primary closure (LC) and purse-string closure (PS) being the most common. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare LC and PS skin closure after stoma reversal in terms of surgical site infection (SSI) rates, wound healing, and cosmesis.

methodsIn accordance with the PRISMA statement, a systematic review of skin closure after stoma reversal was conducted using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus.

resultsEleven studies, enrolling 1,052 patients (PS, n=534; LC, n=518), published between 2006 and 2024, were included. The overall quality of the studies was considered acceptable, with a mean Jadad scale score of 4 (range, 3-5). Patients underwent ileostomy or ileostomy/colostomy in 6 and 5 studies, respectively. No differences were observed between groups in operative time, length of hospital stay, intestinal obstruction, or incisional hernia. However, SSI and overall infection rates were higher in the LC group, with a statistically significant difference for SSI.

conclusionSkin closure following stoma reversal using the PS technique may offer advantages over LC. PS is associated with significantly lower SSI rates compared to LC. Although a large randomized controlled trial with long-term follow-up is still required, current findings suggest that PS could be considered the standard of care for wound closure after ileostomy reversal.

Indexed as

IleostomyPurse-string sutureSurgical wound closure techniquesSurgical wound infection

Identifiers

PMID41486907
PMCPMC12766392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.