ArticleBMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies2025
Economic analysis of triclosan-coated versus uncoated sutures at preventing surgical site infection in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.
Article in BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Surgical site infection prevention: a scoping review of strategies, implementation barriers, and emerging approaches.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: A recent meta-analysis of high-quality randomized trials casts doubt on the effectiveness of triclosan-coated sutures in reducing surgical site infection (SSI). This economic analysis is aimed at assessing whether triclosan-coated sutures, compared with uncoated sutures, can reduce costs from a healthcare perspective. Design: This was a model-based economic analysis mainly informed by baseline SSI rates, effect size CIs from a recent meta-analysis of high-quality trials (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.09, p=0.29), and country-specific cost data. Setting: This was a worldwide analysis that estimated average cost savings aggregated for high, middle, and low Human Development Index (HDI) countries and country-specific cost savings for the 193 countries on the HDI list. Participants: Participants were patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The analysis was informed by baseline SSI rates from an international cohort study (12 539 patients). Main outcome measures: Results are reported in 2022 US dollars as average cost differences associated with SSI between coated and uncoated sutures. Deterministic sensitivity analyses examined variations in suture cost, hospital stay costs, and effect size, with best and worst-case scenario analyses. Results: SSI-related cost differences per patient ranged from -$466 to $171 in high-HDI, -$23 to $18 in middle-HDI, and -$34 to $22 in low-HDI countries when triclosan-coated sutures were used. The largest potential savings and expenditure occurred in contaminated-dirty wounds. Similar results were observed at the national level in 184 of 193 countries. Best-case to worst-case analyses showed a range of -$533 to $192 in high-HDI, -$57 to $49 in middle-HDI and -$69 to $52 in low-HDI countries. Conclusions: This analysis highlights significant uncertainty regarding cost savings with routine use of triclosan-coated sutures, emphasizing the need for high-quality data and CI-based economic analysis in policy making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.