Suppr超能文献

在全膝关节置换术中使用带倒刺缝线进行伤口缝合的更好策略。

A better strategy using barbed sutures for wound closure in total knee arthroplasty.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Tianjin 30052, PR China.

Department of Orthopedics, Characteristic Medical Center of Chinese Armed Police Force, Tianjin 300162, PR China.

出版信息

J Comp Eff Res. 2019 Jul;8(10):799-814. doi: 10.2217/cer-2019-0019. Epub 2019 Jul 30.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to systematically compare the clinical outcomes between knee barbed sutures (KBS) and knee traditional sutures (KTS) for wound closure in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study retrieved potential academic articles comparing the clinical outcomes between KBS and KTS in TKA from the MEDLINE database, the PubMed database, the EMBASE database and the Cochrane Library. The reference articles for the identified studies were carefully reviewed to ensure that all available documents were represented in the study. A total of 14 articles (eight randomized controlled trials [RCTs], six non-RCTs) were involved in our study. The overall participants of barbed Sutures group were 1255, whereas it was 1247 in the traditional sutures. Our meta-analysis showed that KBS is preferable for wound closure of TKA as its shorter lower total cost (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -276.281, 95% CI = -480.281 to -72.280; p = 0.008) and wound closure time (WMD = -4.895,95% CI = -6.105 to -3.685; p < 0.001). However, there was no difference in any complications (p = 0.572), wound complications (p = 0.550), superficial infection (p = 0.918), deep infection (p = 0.654), wound dehiscence (p = 0.649), suture abscess (p = 0.939), arthrofibrosis (p = 0.970), needle sticks (p = 0.158), suture breakage (p = 0.371) and knee society scores (KSS; p = 0.073). The use of KBS in TKA is associated with significantly shortened wound closure times and total closure cost without increased risk of intraoperative needle sticks and suture breakage and postoperative incision complications. Given the relevant possible biases in our study, adequately powered and more RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to compare the efficacy and safety between KBS and KTS.

摘要

本研究旨在进行荟萃分析,系统比较膝关节倒刺缝线(KBS)与传统缝线(KTS)在全膝关节置换术(TKA)中伤口闭合的临床效果。本研究从 MEDLINE 数据库、PubMed 数据库、EMBASE 数据库和 Cochrane 图书馆检索比较 KBS 与 KTS 在 TKA 中临床效果的潜在学术文章。仔细查阅确定研究的参考文献,以确保研究中包含所有可用的文献。共有 14 篇文章(8 篇随机对照试验[RCT],6 篇非 RCT)纳入本研究。倒刺缝线组的总参与者为 1255 人,传统缝线组为 1247 人。我们的荟萃分析表明,KBS 更适合 TKA 的伤口闭合,因为其较低的总成本更低(加权均数差[WMD]=-276.281,95%CI=-480.281 至-72.280;p=0.008)和伤口闭合时间更短(WMD=-4.895,95%CI=-6.105 至-3.685;p<0.001)。然而,在任何并发症(p=0.572)、伤口并发症(p=0.550)、浅表感染(p=0.918)、深部感染(p=0.654)、伤口裂开(p=0.649)、缝线脓肿(p=0.939)、关节纤维粘连(p=0.970)、针刺痛(p=0.158)、缝线断裂(p=0.371)和膝关节学会评分(KSS;p=0.073)方面均无差异。在 TKA 中使用 KBS 可显著缩短伤口闭合时间和总闭合成本,而不会增加术中针刺痛和缝线断裂以及术后切口并发症的风险。鉴于本研究中存在的相关偏倚,需要进行更多具有长期随访的、充分有力的 RCT 来比较 KBS 与 KTS 的疗效和安全性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验