• Br J Surg · Aug 2021

    Meta Analysis

    A meta-analysis on continuous versus interrupted skin closure following appendicectomy.

    • A Sharma, V Rajalingam, H Nageswaran, and L Best.
    • Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.
    • Br J Surg. 2021 Aug 19; 108 (8): 898-907.

    BackgroundThe aim of this review was to analyse RCTs comparing wound-related outcomes between continuous subcuticular and interrupted transdermal wound closures for open appendicectomies in all age groups.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in April 2020 (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, PROSPERO, Google Scholar, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). RCTs without restrictions on study language, year, status of publication, and patient age were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the risk-of-bias tool for RCTs. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) for binary and continuous variables were calculated using random-effects models. A summary-of-findings table was generated to assess the level of evidence.ResultsEleven trials were included (1781 patients analysed, 891 in continuous and 890 in interrupted groups). The overall rate of wound infection was 7.1 per cent. There was no significant difference in the risk of wound infection (11 trials, 1781 patients; RR 1.13, 95 per cent c.i. 0.77 to 1.66; P = 0.530) or wound exploration (7 trials, 1129 patients; RR 0.74, 0.41 to 1.34, P = 0.320) between the two groups. Continuous wound closure had a significantly reduced risk of wound dehiscence (6 trials, 865 patients; RR 0.16, 0.05 to 0.50; P = 0.002) and smaller wound scar (3 trials, 417 patients; MD -2.11 (95 per cent c.i. -2.57 to -1.66) mm; P < 0.001). The absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat for wound dehiscence were 6.1 per cent and 16 respectively. There was no significant statistical heterogeneity for all outcomes (I2 0-15 per cent, χ2 P > 0.100). Most RCTs had a high risk of bias.ConclusionContinuous subcuticular open appendicectomy wound closure is not associated with an increased risk of wound infection and exploration. This method of closure has a reduced risk of wound dehiscence and better cosmetic outcomes.© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…