Cochrane · systematic review · CD010424
Peritoneal closure versus no peritoneal closure for patients undergoing non‐obstetric abdominal operations
Gurusamy, KS, Cassar Delia, E, Davidson, BR · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2013 · Cochrane Library
WoundsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 100%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Peritoneal closure versus no peritoneal closure for decreasing wound complications after non‐obstetric abdominal operations
Population: patients having non‐obstetric abdominal operations
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mortality Peritoneal closure vs no peritoneal closure | RR 1.11 [0.56, 2.19] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Deep wound dehiscence Peritoneal closure vs no peritoneal closure | RR 0.71 [0.22, 2.35] | 3 studies · 663 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Incisional hernia Peritoneal closure vs no peritoneal closure | RR 0.92 [0.37, 2.28] | 3 studies · 663 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Length of hospital stay Peritoneal closure vs no peritoneal closure | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 79 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |