SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:98/13792 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Dion G Morton

Karla Hemming

Kay Futaba

Mary Pennant

Richard J Lilford

Thomas Pinkney

PubMed

OBJECTIVE:

To systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes.

DESIGN:

A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates.

RESULTS:

Eleven systematic reviews, including 13,661 observations, met the inclusion criteria. In orthopaedic surgery sutures were found to be preferable, and for appendicial stump sutures were protective against both surgical site infection and post surgical complications. However, staples were protective against leak in ilecolic anastomosis. For all other surgery types the evidence was inconclusive with wider confidence intervals including the possibly of preferential outcomes for surgical site infection or post surgical complication for either staples or sutures. Whilst reviews showed substantial variation in mean differences in operating time (I(2) 94%) there was clear evidence of a reduction in average operating time across all surgery types. Few reviews reported on length of stay, but the three reviews that did (I(2) 0%, including 950 observations) showed a non significant reduction in length of stay, but showed evidence of publication bias (P-value for Egger test 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

Evidence across surgical specialties indicates that wound closure with staples reduces the mean operating time. Despite including several thousand observations, no clear evidence of superiority emerged for either staples or sutures with respect to surgical site infection, post surgical complications, or length of stay

Hemming, Karla

Pinkney, T.

Futaba, K.

Pennant, M.

Morton, D. G.

Lilford, Richard

Warwick Research Archives Portal Repository

A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis : staples versus sutures for surgical procedures

ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes.DesignA systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates.ResultsEleven systematic reviews, including 13,661 observations, met the inclusion criteria. In orthopaedic surgery sutures were found to be preferable, and for appendicial stump sutures were protective against both surgical site infection and post surgical complications. However, staples were protective against leak in ilecolic anastomosis. For all other surgery types the evidence was inconclusive with wider confidence intervals including the possibly of preferential outcomes for surgical site infection or post surgical complication for either staples or sutures. Whilst reviews showed substantial variation in mean differences in operating time (I2 94%) there was clear evidence of a reduction in average operating time across all surgery types. Few reviews reported on length of stay, but the three reviews that did (I2 0%, including 950 observations) showed a non significant reduction in length of stay, but showed evidence of publication bias (P-value for Egger test 0.05).ConclusionsEvidence across surgical specialties indicates that wound closure with staples reduces the mean operating time. Despite including several thousand observations, no clear evidence of superiority emerged for either staples or sutures with respect to surgical site infection, post surgical complications, or length of stay

Pinkney, Thomas

Futaba, Kay

Pennant, Mary

Morton, Dion G.

Lilford, Richard J.

University of Birmingham Research Portal

A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis: staples versus sutures for surgical procedures

Dion G. Morton

Richard J. Lilford

Crossref

PLoS ONE

A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews and Panoramic Meta-Analysis: Staples versus Sutures for Surgical Procedures

<div>ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes.DesignA systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates.ResultsEleven systematic reviews, including 13,661 observations, met the inclusion criteria. In orthopaedic surgery sutures were found to be preferable, and for appendicial stump sutures were protective against both surgical site infection and post surgical complications. However, staples were protective against leak in ilecolic anastomosis. For all other surgery types the evidence was inconclusive with wider confidence intervals including the possibly of preferential outcomes for surgical site infection or post surgical complication for either staples or sutures. Whilst reviews showed substantial variation in mean differences in operating time (I2 94%) there was clear evidence of a reduction in average operating time across all surgery types. Few reviews reported on length of stay, but the three reviews that did (I2 0%, including 950 observations) showed a non significant reduction in length of stay, but showed evidence of publication bias (P-value for Egger test 0.05).ConclusionsEvidence across surgical specialties indicates that wound closure with staples reduces the mean operating time. Despite including several thousand observations, no clear evidence of superiority emerged for either staples or sutures with respect to surgical site infection, post surgical complications, or length of stay.</div

Karla Hemming (159311)

Thomas Pinkney (467511)

Kay Futaba (467512)

Mary Pennant (467513)

Dion G. Morton (411516)

Richard J. Lilford (159321)

The Francis Crick Institute

Guild of Editors, London (United Kingdom)

OpenGrey Repository

Tomorrow's journalist  The `White Paper' on editorial training

English

Objective: To systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes. Design: A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates. Results: Eleven systematic reviews, including 13,661 observations, met the inclusion criteria. In orthopaedic surgery sutures were found to be preferable, and for appendicial stump sutures were protective against both surgical site infection and post surgical complications. However, staples were protective against leak in ilecolic anastomosis. For all other surgery types the evidence was inconclusive with wider confidence intervals including the possibly of preferential outcomes for surgical site infection or post surgical complication for either staples or sutures. Whilst reviews showed substantial variation in mean differences in operating time (I2 94%) there was clear evidence of a reduction in average operating time across all surgery types. Few reviews reported on length of stay, but the three reviews that did (I2 0%, including 950 observations) showed a non significant reduction in length of stay, but showed evidence of publication bias (P-value for Egger test 0.05). Conclusions: Evidence across surgical specialties indicates that wound closure with staples reduces the mean operating time. Despite including several thousand observations, no clear evidence of superiority emerged for either staples or suture

CiteSeerX

OBJECTIVE:To systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes. DESIGN:A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates. RESULTS:Eleven systematic reviews, including 13,661 observations, met the inclusion criteria. In orthopaedic surgery sutures were found to be preferable, and for appendicial stump sutures were protective against both surgical site infection and post surgical complications. However, staples were protective against leak in ilecolic anastomosis. For all other surgery types the evidence was inconclusive with wider confidence intervals including the possibly of preferential outcomes for surgical site infection or post surgical complication for either staples or sutures. Whilst reviews showed substantial variation in mean differences in operating time (I(2) 94%) there was clear evidence of a reduction in average operating time across all surgery types. Few reviews reported on length of stay, but the three reviews that did (I(2) 0%, including 950 observations) showed a non significant reduction in length of stay, but showed evidence of publication bias (P-value for Egger test 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Evidence across surgical specialties indicates that wound closure with staples reduces the mean operating time. Despite including several thousand observations, no clear evidence of superiority emerged for either staples or sutures with respect to surgical site infection, post surgical complications, or length of stay

Directory of Open Access Journals

A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis: staples versus sutures for surgical procedures.

https://figshare.com/articles/_A_Systematic_Review_of_Systematic_Reviews_and_Panoramic_Meta_Analysis_Staples_versus_Sutures_for_Surgical_Procedures_/816345

Tomorrow's journalist The `White Paper' on editorial training

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Warwick Research Archives Portal Repository

University of Birmingham Research Portal

Crossref

The Francis Crick Institute

OpenGrey Repository

University of Birmingham Research Portal

CiteSeerX

Directory of Open Access Journals