Comparison of Infection Rate Between Sterile and Nonsterile Gloves During Mohs Micrographic Surgery: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Sarto Rubiana1ORCID,Pereira Lívia F.2,Mesquita Yasmin3,Chater Regina C.4,Lapenda Izadora5,Moury Luana6,Moraes-Souza Rafaela7

Affiliation:

1. Division of Medicine, University Hospital Llandough, Penarth, UK

2. Division of Medicine, Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais, Minas Gerais, Brazil

3. Division of Medicine, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

4. Division of Medicine, Faculdade Israelita de Ciências da Saúde Albert Einstein, Sao Paulo, Brazil

5. Division of Medicine, Pernambuco School of Health, Pernambuco, Brazil

6. Dermatology Division, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA

7. Dermatology Division, La Paz Hospital, Madrid, Spain

Abstract

Background: Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is a well-established technique for the removal of various types of skin cancers. While sterile gloves (SG) are commonly used in skin surgeries such as MMS, additional understanding of their effectiveness compared to nonsterile gloves (NSG) in preventing local infection is required. Objective: We aimed to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the use of SG with NSG for local infection rate post-MMS and point out cost discrepancies between these 2 scenarios. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane for studies published up to August 2023 comparing the use of SG with NSG during MMS that reported the outcome of wound infection. Results: A total of 4 studies with 10,644 MMS were included, of which 7512 (70.6%) were performed with SG and 3132 (29.4%) were done with NSG. In the SG group, 232 out of 7512 cases (3.1%) developed infection compared to 64 out of 3132 (2.0%) in the NSG group [odds ratio (OR) 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-1.52; P = .39; I2 = 0%]. Therefore, the post-MMS infection rates were not significantly different between SG and NSG groups, including in the excision (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.48-1.79; P = .81; I2 = 0%) and reconstruction (OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.85-1.60; P = .34; I2 = 0%) subanalysis. Regarding the mean cost of the gloves, the NSG pair was $0.24, approximately 10% of the price of the SG pair ($2.27). Conclusion: The results support that, compared to SG, NSG are equally effective in preventing infections during MMS while offering significant cost savings without compromising patient outcomes. Protocol registration: PROSPERO, CRD42023458525

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3