SynthesisUpdates in surgery2026
Negative pressure wound therapy in primary closure surgeries for pilonidal disease: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Treatment of gastrocnemius spasms induced by foot injury using negative pressure wound therapy: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary closure with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been investigated in patients with sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus to enhance healing and reduce recurrence. To address existing controversies, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing primary closure with NPWT versus non-NPWT (control) for treatment of pilonidal disease. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to December 2024 to identify studies comparing NPWT versus control in primary closure surgeries in pilonidal sinus. Statistical analyses were performed using R Software with a random-effects model. Six studies with a total of 479 patients were included, of whom 164 (34.2%) underwent NPWT. NPWT had an association with lower pain score 24 h postoperative (MD - 0.65 points; 95% CI - 0.81 to - 0.50), shorter return time to activities (MD - 2.57 days; 95% CI - 3.74 to - 1.4). However, there was no difference between groups in the time of wound closure (MD - 18.94; 95% CI - 41.68 to 3.80), rate of wound dehiscence (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.14), hospital length of stay (MD - 3.05; 95% CI - 15.77 to 9.67), infection rates (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.05 to 2.84), recurrence rates (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.07 to 4.48), and pain 6 h post-operative, which showed a borderline trend favoring NPWT but did not reach statistical significance (MD - 1.19; 95% CI - 2.38 to 0.01). NPWT appears to shorten time to resume normal activities and pain 24 h postoperatively. Despite these promising results, more randomized clinical trials are needed for greater analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41880146What 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.