ArticleCureus2026
Evaluating Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy Use Following High-Risk Caesarean Section in a Middle East Population.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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.
- Value of a self-made subcutaneous negative-pressure drain in cesarean delivery: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
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
Surgical site complications (SSCs) following caesarean section impact maternal morbidity and mortality. To mitigate SSC development, incision management strategies such as closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) can be utilised. The effect of ciNPT on the management of closed incisions following caesarean section was examined in the present study. Patients underwent caesarean section between 2022 and 2024 at a single acute care hospital in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). All 82 patients underwent vaginal cleansing and received antibiotics prior to surgery. A Pfannenstiel incision was used, followed by closure with subcuticular suturing. Patients received either traditional silver dressings (Mepilex Border Ag Dressing; Mölnlycke Health Care, Peachtree Corners, USA) (standard of care (SOC) group, n=28) or ciNPT (3M Prevena Incision Management System; Solventum, Maplewood, USA) (ciNPT group, n=54) for postoperative care. Patient and incision outcomes were assessed at each dressing change. Welch two-sample t-tests compared continuous variables, and Fisher's exact tests compared categorical variables. There were no significant differences between the ciNPT and SOC groups for baseline demographics; however, the ciNPT group had a higher proportion of severely obese patients (body mass index (BMI) >40 kg/m
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.