International journal of colorectal disease · 2018
Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure techniques in stoma closure: a comprehensive meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomised trials.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hajibandeh Shahab, Hajibandeh Shahin, Kennedy-Dalby Andrew, Rehman Sheik, Zadeh Reza Arsalani
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare purse-string skin closure (PSC) and linear skin closure (LSC) techniques in patients undergoing stoma closure METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis of outcomes according to PRISMA statement standards to compare PSC and LSC techniques in stoma closure. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to assess the possibility of type I or II error and compute the information size required for conclusive meta-analysis.
RESULTS: We identified six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and eight observational studies, enrolling a total of 1102 patients. The included populations in the PSC and LSC groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. The risk of surgical site infection (SSI) was significantly lower in the PSC group (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.06, 0.18; P < 0.00001). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of operative time (MD 1.80; 95% CI - 1.35, 4.96; P = 0.26), anastomotic leak (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.21, 2.48; P = 0.61), incisional hernia (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.25, 1.37; P = 0.22), small bowel obstruction (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50, 1.86; P = 0.91), and length of hospital stay (MD - 0.04; 95% CI - 0.51, 0.42; P = 0.86). Patient satisfaction was higher in the PSC group. TSA showed that the risk of type 1 error was minimal and meta-analysis was conclusive.
CONCLUSIONS: PSC is associated with significantly lower risk of SSI and better patient satisfaction compared with LSC in closure of stomas and should be the closure technique of choice. The current available evidence is robust and conclusive highlighting that the results of the current study should be incorporated into clinical practice without a need for further trial data.
RESULTS: We identified six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and eight observational studies, enrolling a total of 1102 patients. The included populations in the PSC and LSC groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. The risk of surgical site infection (SSI) was significantly lower in the PSC group (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.06, 0.18; P < 0.00001). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of operative time (MD 1.80; 95% CI - 1.35, 4.96; P = 0.26), anastomotic leak (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.21, 2.48; P = 0.61), incisional hernia (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.25, 1.37; P = 0.22), small bowel obstruction (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50, 1.86; P = 0.91), and length of hospital stay (MD - 0.04; 95% CI - 0.51, 0.42; P = 0.86). Patient satisfaction was higher in the PSC group. TSA showed that the risk of type 1 error was minimal and meta-analysis was conclusive.
CONCLUSIONS: PSC is associated with significantly lower risk of SSI and better patient satisfaction compared with LSC in closure of stomas and should be the closure technique of choice. The current available evidence is robust and conclusive highlighting that the results of the current study should be incorporated into clinical practice without a need for further trial data.