Cochrane · systematic review · CD011757
Absorbable versus non‐absorbable sutures for skin closure after carpal tunnel decompression surgery
Wade, RG, Wormald, JCR, Figus, A · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2018 · Cochrane Library
NeuromuscularAMSTAR 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
12
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
5
Included studies
NR
No studies 5 · 41.7%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 7 · 58.3%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
Absorbable versus non‐absorbable sutures for skin closure after open carpal tunnel decompression surgery
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Postoperative pain: early pain (10 days postoperatively) VAS 0 to 10 Verbal reporting scale No pain‐mild pain‐moderate pain‐severe pain (converted to numerical scale (0 to 3, 3 to 6, 6 to 10) Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 137 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Postoperative pain: late pain (6 weeks postoperatively) VAS 0 to 10 Verbal reporting scale No pain‐mild pain‐moderate pain‐severe pain (converted to numerical scale (0 to 3, 3 to 6, 6 to 10) Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 175 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Postoperative hand function (2 weeks postoperatively) Mean CTS‐FSS score (scale 1 to 5, where higher scores indicate worse function) Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 36 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Wound Inflammation 6 to 12 weeks Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | RR 2.28 [0.24, 21.91] | 2 studies · 95 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Postoperative scar satisfaction Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse outcomes including wound infection, scar breakdown or return to theatre Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Absorbable versus non‐absorbable sutures for skin closure after endoscopic carpal tunnel decompression surgery
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Postoperative pain: early pain (10 days postoperatively) VAS 0 to 10 Verbal reporting scale No pain‐mild pain‐moderate pain‐severe pain (converted to numerical scale (0 to 3, 3 to 6, 6 to 10) Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 54 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Postoperative pain: late pain (6 weeks postoperatively) Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Postoperative hand function Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Wound Inflammation 6 to 12 weeks Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | RR 0.93 [0.06, 14.09] | 1 study · 54 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Postoperative scar satisfaction Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | RR 1.29 [0.97, 1.72] | NR | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adverse outcomes including wound infection, scar breakdown or return to theatre Absorbable vs non‐absorbable sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |