ArticleBMC surgery2026
Comparison of continuous single-layer and traditional interrupted suturing techniques in stoma surgery: a retrospective single-center study.
Article in BMC surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProphylactic ileostomy is frequently performed in colorectal surgery to mitigate the consequences of anastomotic leakage. The optimal fixation method, however, remains debated. We compared clinical efficiency and safety of continuous single layer versus traditional interrupted suturing for ileostomy fixation.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent prophylactic ileostomy fixation. Patients were grouped by fixation technique: continuous single-layer (n = 111) and traditional interruption (n = 63), as derived from the finalized case-level dataset compiled in this project. Baseline variables (age, BMI) and perioperative outcomes (stoma creation time, stoma takedown (mobilization) time, length of stay) were compared between groups. Stoma-related complications were analyzed as overall incidence.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable between groups (age, BMI; all p > 0.05). Compared with the interrupted method, the continuous single-layer technique was associated with a markedly shorter stoma creation time (median 17.4 vs. 28.4 min; p < 0.001) and a shorter stoma takedown (mobilization) time (median 28.0 vs. 39.5 min; p < 0.001). A small between-group difference in length of stay was observed; given potential confounding and perioperative heterogeneity, this should not be interpreted as a direct effect of the suturing technique. The overall stoma-related complication rate was similar between groups (dermatitis, prolapse, retraction, stenosis, necrosis, parastomal hernia; all p > 0.05).
conclusionUsing a continuous single-layer suture for ileostomy fixation shortened operative steps (creation and takedown [mobilization]) without increasing stoma-related complications compared with the traditional interrupted technique. A small reduction in hospital stay was observed but cannot be attributed solely to the suturing method. This approach is efficient and may represent an efficient alternative pending prospective validation.
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.