Cargando…

Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there still remains a significant advantage in the use of sutures to staples for orthopaedic skin closure in adult patients. DESIGN: Systematic Review/ Meta-Analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE-OVID, EMBASE-OVID, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Grey and unpublished literature...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krishnan, Rohin, MacNeil, S Danielle, Malvankar-Mehta, Monali S
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4735308/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26792213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009257
_version_ 1782413058738487296
author Krishnan, Rohin
MacNeil, S Danielle
Malvankar-Mehta, Monali S
author_facet Krishnan, Rohin
MacNeil, S Danielle
Malvankar-Mehta, Monali S
author_sort Krishnan, Rohin
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there still remains a significant advantage in the use of sutures to staples for orthopaedic skin closure in adult patients. DESIGN: Systematic Review/ Meta-Analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE-OVID, EMBASE-OVID, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Grey and unpublished literature was also explored by searching: International Clinical Trial Registry, Grey Matters BIOSIS Previews, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, ClinicalTrials.gov, UK Clinical Trials Gateway, UK Clinical Research Network Study Portfolio, Open Grey, Grey Literature Report, and Web of Science. SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles were from any country, written in English and published after 1950. We included all randomised control trials and observational studies comparing adults (≥18 years) undergoing orthopaedic surgery who either received staples or sutures for skin closure. The primary outcome was the incidence of surgical site infection. Secondary outcomes included closure time, inflammation, length of stay, pain, abscess formation, necrosis, discharge, wound dehiscence, allergic reaction and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: 13 studies were included in our cumulative meta-analysis conducted using Review Manager V.5.0. The risk ratio was computed as a measure of the treatment effect taking into account heterogeneity. Random-effect models were applied. There was no significant difference in infection comparing sutures to staples. The cumulative relative risk was 1.06 (0.46 to 2.44). In addition, there was no difference in infection comparing sutures to staples in hip and knee surgery, respectively. Lastly, except for closure time, there was no significant difference in secondary outcomes comparing sutures to staples. CONCLUSIONS: Except for closure time, there was no significant difference in superficial infection and secondary outcomes comparing sutures to staples was found. Given that there may in fact be no difference in effect between the two skin closure and the methodological limitations of included studies, authors should begin to consider the economic and logistic implications of using staples or sutures for skin closure. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015017481.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4735308
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47353082016-02-09 Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis Krishnan, Rohin MacNeil, S Danielle Malvankar-Mehta, Monali S BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there still remains a significant advantage in the use of sutures to staples for orthopaedic skin closure in adult patients. DESIGN: Systematic Review/ Meta-Analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE-OVID, EMBASE-OVID, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Grey and unpublished literature was also explored by searching: International Clinical Trial Registry, Grey Matters BIOSIS Previews, Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, ClinicalTrials.gov, UK Clinical Trials Gateway, UK Clinical Research Network Study Portfolio, Open Grey, Grey Literature Report, and Web of Science. SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles were from any country, written in English and published after 1950. We included all randomised control trials and observational studies comparing adults (≥18 years) undergoing orthopaedic surgery who either received staples or sutures for skin closure. The primary outcome was the incidence of surgical site infection. Secondary outcomes included closure time, inflammation, length of stay, pain, abscess formation, necrosis, discharge, wound dehiscence, allergic reaction and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: 13 studies were included in our cumulative meta-analysis conducted using Review Manager V.5.0. The risk ratio was computed as a measure of the treatment effect taking into account heterogeneity. Random-effect models were applied. There was no significant difference in infection comparing sutures to staples. The cumulative relative risk was 1.06 (0.46 to 2.44). In addition, there was no difference in infection comparing sutures to staples in hip and knee surgery, respectively. Lastly, except for closure time, there was no significant difference in secondary outcomes comparing sutures to staples. CONCLUSIONS: Except for closure time, there was no significant difference in superficial infection and secondary outcomes comparing sutures to staples was found. Given that there may in fact be no difference in effect between the two skin closure and the methodological limitations of included studies, authors should begin to consider the economic and logistic implications of using staples or sutures for skin closure. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015017481. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4735308/ /pubmed/26792213 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009257 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Evidence Based Practice
Krishnan, Rohin
MacNeil, S Danielle
Malvankar-Mehta, Monali S
Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparing sutures versus staples for skin closure after orthopaedic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Evidence Based Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4735308/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26792213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009257
work_keys_str_mv AT krishnanrohin comparingsuturesversusstaplesforskinclosureafterorthopaedicsurgerysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT macneilsdanielle comparingsuturesversusstaplesforskinclosureafterorthopaedicsurgerysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT malvankarmehtamonalis comparingsuturesversusstaplesforskinclosureafterorthopaedicsurgerysystematicreviewandmetaanalysis