We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Wound-edge protection devices in gastrointestinal surgery: a meta-analysis.
Journal of Surgical Research 2016 December
BACKGROUND: The role of wound-edge protection devices (WEPDs) in wound infection prevention is still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the protective efficiency of WEPDs in gastrointestinal surgery in a pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A variety of sources were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the protective efficiency of WEPDs in gastrointestinal surgery. Subgroup analysis and meta-regressions were conducted to investigate the possible influence of the type of WEPD on the size of intervention effect. This review was conducted in accordance with a prespecified protocol based on the guidance of the Cochrane Handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement.
RESULTS: Sixteen studies with 3663 patients were included. The WEPDs usage led to a significant decrease in surgical wound infection (risk ratio [RR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.87; P = 0.005; I2 = 63%), with the dual-ring design usage yielding a more significant reduction in surgical wound infection (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.11-0.50; P = 0.0002; I2 = 29%), whereas the single-ring design usage yielding a nonsignificant result (RR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.58-1.04; P = 0.09; I2 = 53%).
CONCLUSIONS: Double-ring WEPD, but not single-ring design, reduces wound infection rate significantly in gastrointestinal surgery. Therefore, the use of single-ring WEPD should be reconsidered.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A variety of sources were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the protective efficiency of WEPDs in gastrointestinal surgery. Subgroup analysis and meta-regressions were conducted to investigate the possible influence of the type of WEPD on the size of intervention effect. This review was conducted in accordance with a prespecified protocol based on the guidance of the Cochrane Handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement.
RESULTS: Sixteen studies with 3663 patients were included. The WEPDs usage led to a significant decrease in surgical wound infection (risk ratio [RR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.87; P = 0.005; I2 = 63%), with the dual-ring design usage yielding a more significant reduction in surgical wound infection (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.11-0.50; P = 0.0002; I2 = 29%), whereas the single-ring design usage yielding a nonsignificant result (RR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.58-1.04; P = 0.09; I2 = 53%).
CONCLUSIONS: Double-ring WEPD, but not single-ring design, reduces wound infection rate significantly in gastrointestinal surgery. Therefore, the use of single-ring WEPD should be reconsidered.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app