Antimicrobial-coated sutures versus non-coated sutures in reducing surgical site infection: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Y. Yang , Z. Zhou , R. Ma , J. Ren , X. Wu
{"title":"Antimicrobial-coated sutures versus non-coated sutures in reducing surgical site infection: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Y. Yang ,&nbsp;Z. Zhou ,&nbsp;R. Ma ,&nbsp;J. Ren ,&nbsp;X. Wu","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2024.04.027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Antimicrobial-coated sutures are one of the strategies to avoid surgical site infection (SSI) caused by microbial colonization on the surface of surgical sutures.</p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>To investigate the effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated sutures in reducing SSI and develop the latest systematic evaluation evidence for clinical SSI prevention and the use of antimicrobial-coated sutures.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The databases of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, African Index Medicus, and WHO Global Health were searched from October 10<sup>th</sup>, 1990 to March 3<sup>rd</sup>, 2023 with language restricted to English, Spanish, and French. Meta-analysis was used to evaluate the impact of antimicrobial-coated sutures on SSI and whether their effectiveness is influenced by the type of sutures or wounds. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on type of sutures and wounds. Finally, quality of the retrieved evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Twenty-six randomized control trials (RCTs) and nine observational studies (OBSs) met the inclusion criteria. Antimicrobial sutures significantly reduced SSI risk (RCTs: odds ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval: 0.63–0.87; <em>P</em> = 0.0002; OBSs: OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.48–0.76; <em>P</em> &lt; 0.0001). Only subgroup analysis of Polydioxanone Suture (PDS) Plus vs PDS, Vicryl Plus vs Vicryl and mixed wounds revealed consistent results in favour of antimicrobial-coated sutures. According to GRADE, the quality of RCT evidence is moderate, while that of OBS evidence is low.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Antimicrobial-coated sutures are effective in reducing the risk of postoperative SSI among a large number of surgical patients. However, the available evidence is of moderate/low quality and many studies had conflicts of interest.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195670124001919","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Antimicrobial-coated sutures are one of the strategies to avoid surgical site infection (SSI) caused by microbial colonization on the surface of surgical sutures.

Aim

To investigate the effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated sutures in reducing SSI and develop the latest systematic evaluation evidence for clinical SSI prevention and the use of antimicrobial-coated sutures.

Methods

The databases of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, African Index Medicus, and WHO Global Health were searched from October 10th, 1990 to March 3rd, 2023 with language restricted to English, Spanish, and French. Meta-analysis was used to evaluate the impact of antimicrobial-coated sutures on SSI and whether their effectiveness is influenced by the type of sutures or wounds. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on type of sutures and wounds. Finally, quality of the retrieved evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Findings

Twenty-six randomized control trials (RCTs) and nine observational studies (OBSs) met the inclusion criteria. Antimicrobial sutures significantly reduced SSI risk (RCTs: odds ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval: 0.63–0.87; P = 0.0002; OBSs: OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.48–0.76; P < 0.0001). Only subgroup analysis of Polydioxanone Suture (PDS) Plus vs PDS, Vicryl Plus vs Vicryl and mixed wounds revealed consistent results in favour of antimicrobial-coated sutures. According to GRADE, the quality of RCT evidence is moderate, while that of OBS evidence is low.

Conclusion

Antimicrobial-coated sutures are effective in reducing the risk of postoperative SSI among a large number of surgical patients. However, the available evidence is of moderate/low quality and many studies had conflicts of interest.

抗菌涂层缝合线与无涂层缝合线在减少手术部位感染方面的比较:最新系统综述和荟萃分析。
目的:抗菌涂层缝合线是避免手术缝合线表面微生物定植引起手术部位感染(SSI)的策略之一。本研究旨在探讨抗菌涂层缝合线在减少 SSI 方面的有效性,并为临床 SSI 预防和抗菌涂层缝合线的使用提供最新的系统评估证据:我们检索了 1990 年 10 月 10 日至 2023 年 3 月 3 日的 Medline、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane、African Index Medicus 和 WHO Global Health 等数据库,语言仅限于英语、西班牙语和法语。采用 Meta 分析法评估抗菌涂层缝合线对 SSI 的影响,以及其有效性是否受缝合线或伤口类型的影响。根据缝合线和伤口类型进行了分组分析。最后,采用建议评估、发展和评价分级法(GRADE)对检索到的证据进行了质量评估。抗菌缝合线明显降低了 SSI 风险(RCTs:OR: 0.74, 95% CI [0.63-0.87], p = 0.0002; OBSs:OR:0.61,95% CI [0.48-0.76],P < 0.0001)。只有对聚二噁烷酮缝合线(PDS)Plus 与 PDS、Vicryl Plus 与 Vicryl 和混合伤口进行的亚组分析表明,抗菌涂层缝合线的效果一致。根据 GRADE,RCTs 的证据质量为中等,而 OBSs 的证据质量为低:抗菌涂层缝合线可有效降低大量手术患者术后感染 SSI 的风险。结论:抗菌涂层缝合线能有效降低大量手术患者术后感染 SSI 的风险,但现有证据的质量为中度/低度,且许多研究存在利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Hospital Infection
Journal of Hospital Infection 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.80%
发文量
271
审稿时长
19 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hospital Infection is the editorially independent scientific publication of the Healthcare Infection Society. The aim of the Journal is to publish high quality research and information relating to infection prevention and control that is relevant to an international audience. The Journal welcomes submissions that relate to all aspects of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This includes submissions that: provide new insight into the epidemiology, surveillance, or prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings; provide new insight into cleaning, disinfection and decontamination; provide new insight into the design of healthcare premises; describe novel aspects of outbreaks of infection; throw light on techniques for effective antimicrobial stewardship; describe novel techniques (laboratory-based or point of care) for the detection of infection or antimicrobial resistance in the healthcare setting, particularly if these can be used to facilitate infection prevention and control; improve understanding of the motivations of safe healthcare behaviour, or describe techniques for achieving behavioural and cultural change; improve understanding of the use of IT systems in infection surveillance and prevention and control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信