Conectar
This is a study assessing the effectiveness of staples versus sutures for closing incisions after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We searched all relevant literature up to July 2023, and after reading through the full text, we finally included 5 for analysis, with a total of 1084 cases who underwent total hip arthroplasty, of which 548 were closed with staples and 536 with sutures, and evaluated the risk of bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, using the ratio of ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to compare the effectiveness of staples and sutures in wound closure in total hip arthroplasty. The study found that the suture group was superior to the staple group in terms of superficial infection and incisional exudate; superficial infection (OR = 3.04, 95% CI: 1.14–8.07; p = 0.03, I 2 = 0%), incisional exudate (OR = 3.22, 95% CI: 1.84–5.65; p < 0.001, I 2 = 0%) and suture staples were superior to suture group in terms of closure time (WMD = −231.8 95% CI: −429.55 to −34.05; p = 0.02, I 2 = 100%). There was no remarkable distinction between the two groups in terms of deep infection, postoperative hospital, HWES score and patient's satisfaction, deep infection (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.35–4.35; p = 0.74, I 2 = 0%), postoperative hospital (WMD = 2.50 95% CI: −2.25 to 7.25; p = 0.30, I 2 = 100%), HWES score (WMD = −0.38 95% CI: −0.52 to −0.24; p < 0.01, I 2 = 72%) and patient's satisfaction (WMD = −0.23 95% CI: −1.43 to 0.96; p = 0.70, I 2 = 94%); however, due to the small sample sizes of several studies included in this study, caution must be exercised when addressing their value.
To date, we have reviewed the synthesis literature critically through four databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Eight relevant studies were examined after compliance with the criteria for inclusion and exclusion, as well as documentation quality evaluation. This report covered all randomised, controlled studies of total hip arthroplasty (THA) comparing the direct anterior approach (DAA) with the postero-lateral approach (PLA). The main result was surgical site infection rate. The secondary results were duration of the operation, length of the incision and VAS score after surgery. The results of the meta-analyses of wound infections in the present trial did not show any statistically significant difference in DAA versus PLA (between DAA and PLA) (OR = 1.42, 95%CI: 0.5 to 4.04, p = 0.51). Compared with PLA, DAA had shorter surgical incision (WMD = −3.2, 95%CI: −4.00 to −2.41; p < 0.001) and longer operative times(WMD = 14. 67, 95%CI: 9.24 to 20.09; p < 0.001). Postoperative VAS scores were markedly lower in DAA compared with PLA within 6 weeks of surgery (p < 0.05), with low heterogeneities(I 2 = 0). We found that DAA did not differ significantly from PLA in terms of the risk of wound infection for THA and that the surgical incisions was shorter and less postoperative pain after surgery, even though DAA surgery takes longer.
FreshRSS 