Comparison between barbed and non-barbed sutures for fascial closure in abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 SURGERY

Surgery Today Pub Date : 2025-08-23 DOI:10.1007/s00595-025-03118-7

Akihisa Matsuda, Takeshi Yamada, Kay Uehara, Seiichi Shinji, Yasuyuki Yokoyama, Goro Takahashi, Takuma Iwai, Toshimitsu Miyasaka, Shintaro Kanaka, Takanori Matsui, Koki Hayashi, Hiroshi Yoshida

{"title":"Comparison between barbed and non-barbed sutures for fascial closure in abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Akihisa Matsuda, Takeshi Yamada, Kay Uehara, Seiichi Shinji, Yasuyuki Yokoyama, Goro Takahashi, Takuma Iwai, Toshimitsu Miyasaka, Shintaro Kanaka, Takanori Matsui, Koki Hayashi, Hiroshi Yoshida","doi":"10.1007/s00595-025-03118-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of barbed and non-barbed sutures for fascial closure in abdominal surgery.Methods: A systematic literature search through February 2025 identified studies comparing overall surgical site infections (SSI), fascial complications, and hospital stays between barbed and non-barbed sutures. A meta-analysis using random-effects models calculated odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: Seven studies involving 12,278 patients (barbed group, n = 4912; non-barbed group, n = 7366) were included. The overall SSI rates were 1.9% and 4.0% in the barbed and non-barbed groups, respectively. Barbed sutures significantly reduced overall SSIs (OR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.31-0.53; P < 0.001) without statistical heterogeneity. Barbed suture also significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD, - 1.13; 95% CI: - 1.42- - 0.83, P < 0.001) without statistical heterogeneity. No significant difference was observed in fascial complications between the groups (OR, 0.66; 95% CI: 0.36-1.22, P = 0.19).Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis to focus specifically on barbed sutures for abdominal fascial closure. Barbed sutures significantly reduce SSI and hospital stay without increasing fascial complications, thus suggesting that they are safe and efficient options for abdominal wall closure.","PeriodicalId":22163,"journal":{"name":"Surgery Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery Today","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-025-03118-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of barbed and non-barbed sutures for fascial closure in abdominal surgery.

Methods: A systematic literature search through February 2025 identified studies comparing overall surgical site infections (SSI), fascial complications, and hospital stays between barbed and non-barbed sutures. A meta-analysis using random-effects models calculated odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: Seven studies involving 12,278 patients (barbed group, n = 4912; non-barbed group, n = 7366) were included. The overall SSI rates were 1.9% and 4.0% in the barbed and non-barbed groups, respectively. Barbed sutures significantly reduced overall SSIs (OR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.31-0.53; P < 0.001) without statistical heterogeneity. Barbed suture also significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD, - 1.13; 95% CI: - 1.42- - 0.83, P < 0.001) without statistical heterogeneity. No significant difference was observed in fascial complications between the groups (OR, 0.66; 95% CI: 0.36-1.22, P = 0.19).

Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis to focus specifically on barbed sutures for abdominal fascial closure. Barbed sutures significantly reduce SSI and hospital stay without increasing fascial complications, thus suggesting that they are safe and efficient options for abdominal wall closure.

查看原文本刊更多论文

有刺缝线和无刺缝线在腹部外科筋膜闭合中的比较：一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目的：比较有刺缝线和无刺缝线用于腹部外科筋膜闭合的安全性和有效性。方法：到2025年2月进行系统的文献检索，确定了比较有刺缝合和无刺缝合的总体手术部位感染（SSI）、筋膜并发症和住院时间的研究。使用随机效应模型的荟萃分析以95%置信区间（ci）计算优势比（ORs）或平均差异（MDs）。结果：纳入7项研究，共12278例患者（有刺组，n = 4912；无刺组，n = 7366）。有刺组和无刺组的总SSI率分别为1.9%和4.0%。有刺缝线显著降低了总体ssi （OR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.31-0.53； P）。结论：这是第一个专门关注有刺缝线用于腹筋膜闭合的荟萃分析。倒钩缝合线可显著减少SSI和住院时间，而不会增加筋膜并发症，因此表明它们是安全有效的腹壁闭合选择。

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

Surgery Today 医学-外科

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

4.00%

发文量

208

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： Surgery Today is the official journal of the Japan Surgical Society. The main purpose of the journal is to provide a place for the publication of high-quality papers documenting recent advances and new developments in all fields of surgery, both clinical and experimental. The journal welcomes original papers, review articles, and short communications, as well as short technical reports("How to do it"). The "How to do it" section will includes short articles on methods or techniques recommended for practical surgery. Papers submitted to the journal are reviewed by an international editorial board. Field of interest: All fields of surgery.