Skin closure in dogs: do skin staples vs intradermal sutures differ in surgical site infection and dehiscence? — MAYBE (weak evidence) (the treatment made no difference)

MAYBE (weak evidence) (the treatment made no difference): The only record that directly compares the two closure methods named in this shelf's question is a single retrospective study, and it found no difference — but a retrospective null of this size cannot prove the methods are equivalent. In Atwood 2015 (PMID: 25829557; 306 unilateral tibial plateau leveling osteotomy [TPLO] procedures in 242 dogs at one referral centre, 2006–2013), incisional closure with stainless steel skin staples vs intradermal poliglecaprone 25 showed no significant association with the prevalence of postoperative surgical site infection on logistic regression (P < 0.05 threshold); the factors that did significantly influence infection prevalence were body weight and administration of postoperative antimicrobials. The fetched record (PubMed abstract; the PMC record is PDF-only, so no group-level infection rates or dehiscence figures are present in the XML fetched at drafting) reports no per-group infection rates, so no absolute or relative rates can be quoted for this shelf, and it reports no dehiscence outcome at all — the dehiscence half of this shelf's question has no eligible record. Design class (c): randomisation is not established — the study is retrospective, closure method was whatever the record showed, and confounding by surgeon, era and case mix is uncontrolled beyond the regression's covariates. The stamp is therefore MAYBE (weak evidence) with the null suffix: the one direct comparison found no difference, but the evidence is a single retrospective TPLO-only series. One-home cross-points, not carded: the bundled TPLO protocol-change study (PMID: 29878479; implant-associated infection fell from 8.5% pre-change to 1.3% post-change for plate removal) changed many things at once — triclosan-coated intradermal sutures instead of staples was only one component alongside drape, cefazolin timing, gloves, bandage and collar changes — so it cannot carry a staples-vs-intradermal claim. Triclosan-coated suture records (PMIDs 23327178 and 32538702) home on shelf #581 (triclosan-coated suture and surgical site infection), a different question, and are not re-carded here. Randomised records on neighbouring closure questions — polydioxanone vs poliglecaprone 25 skin closure and dehiscence (PMID: 39891030; 22/232 dogs, 9.48%, dehisced without infection across groups) and stainless steel vs absorbable staples after TPLO (PMID: 30378125; 18.8% of incisions diagnosed with inflammation or infection overall, no difference between staple types) — compare different pairs of methods and do not answer staples vs intradermal sutures. Tier C is not engaged: no mortality or survival claim is made. Drafted Nov 10, 2026 (VetMed build, topic #578); figures from the abstracts, fetched and verified at drafting.