Comparison 4. Monofilament versus multifilament sutures.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Incisional hernia	16	4520	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.76 [0.59, 0.98]
1.1 Same closure technique and method	10	2565	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.80 [0.55, 1.15]
1.2 Different closure technique or method	6	1955	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.72 [0.48, 1.09]
2 Wound infection	23	6557	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.08 [0.91, 1.28]
2.1 Same closure technique and method	14	3956	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.00 [0.85, 1.18]
2.2 Different closure technique or method	9	2601	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.35 [0.91, 2.01]
3 Wound dehiscence	22	6199	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.24 [0.93, 1.67]
3.1 Same closure technique and method	12	3465	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.21 [0.76, 1.91]
3.2 Different closure technique or method	10	2734	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.49 [0.88, 2.53]
4 Sinus or fistula formation	8	2285	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.91 [0.77, 4.73]
4.1 Same closure technique and method	6	1784	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.98 [0.79, 4.99]
4.2 Different closure technique or method	2	501	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.36 [0.02, 108.15]
5 Hernia and type of incision	10	2565	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.80 [0.55, 1.15]
5.1 Midline incision only (same technique)	6	1530	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.62 [0.47, 0.81]
5.2 Other incisions, combination of incisions (same technique)	4	1035	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.02 [0.47, 2.24]