1. Barbed versus conventional suture for spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Author
-
Pustilnik HN, Cerqueira GA, Fontes JHM Junior, Meira DA, Medrado Nunes GS, da Cunha BLB, Porto de Oliveira S Junior, da Paz MGDS, Alcântara Ferreira T Junior, de Avellar LM, and Quadros DG
- Abstract
Background: Barbed sutures eliminate knots and may offer some advantages over conventional sutures. This meta-analysis compares clinical, surgical and economic outcomes of barbed sutures with standard closure techniques in spinal surgery., Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science for studies comparing barbed and conventional suture for patients undergoing spinal surgery., Results: We included 6 studies in the analysis, totaling 965 patients. There was no significant difference between the groups in relation to deep infection (RR 0.49; 95% CI: 0.19-1.28; I
2 = 0%), hospital stay duration (MD -0.55; 95% CI: -1.11 to 0.01; I2 = 8%), postoperative hematoma (RR 0.35; 95% CI: 0.04-3.00; I2 = 0%), reintervention due to wound healing problems (RR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.49-1.94; I2 = 5%), superficial infection (RR 0.49; 95% CI: 0.19-1.28; I2 = 0%), total hospitalization cost (MD -440.81; 95% CI: -1118.90 to 237.29; I2 = 63%) and wound dehiscence/seroma, (RR 0.81; 95% CI: 0.29-2.27; I2 = 0%). There was a significant lower operating room time (MD -15.37; 95% CI: -29.43 to -1.32; I2 = 87%) and suturing time (MD -16.17; 95% CI: -20.58 to -11.75; I2 = 91%) in the barbed suture group, beyond a significantly lower risk of total infection (RR 0.55; 95% CI: 0.31-0.98; I2 = 0%)., Conclusion: Our meta-analysis showed that barbed sutures were associated with reduced operating room time, suturing time, and infection rates. These results highlight the safety and potential efficacy of using barbed sutures., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF