Cochrane · systematic review · CD012032
Reconstructive surgery for treating pressure ulcers
Norman, G, Wong, JKF, Amin, K, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2022 · 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
3
current version
GRADE rated
3
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 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
Cone of pressure flap compared with standard flap technique
Population: people with stage IV pressure ulcers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Complete healing of surgical wound Cone of pressure flap vs standard flap technique | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Wound dehiscence Cone of pressure flap vs standard flap technique | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pressure ulcer recurrence Cone of pressure flap vs standard flap technique | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |