ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy of absorbable barbed suture versus traditional absorbable suture in total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect clinical trials of absorbable barbed suture versus traditional absorbable suture in TKA from inception to November, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 cohort studies were included, involving 2 008 patients. Meta-analysis showed that the joint capsule suture time of the absorbable barbed suture group [MD=–4.31, 95% CI (–4.72, –3.90), P<0.000 01], the incidence of acupuncture injury during suture [OR=0.14, 95% CI (0.03, 0.61),P=0.009], and incision complication rate [OR=0.56, 95% CI (0.36, 0.88), P=0.01] were significantly lower than the traditional absorbable suture group, but the incidence of suture fracture [OR=23.03, 95% CI (3.08, 172.09),P=0.002] was higher, yet the difference was statistically significant. There were no significant differences in the incidence of superficial infection, deep infection, aseptic redness, incision dehiscence and KSS score at 3 months after operation (P>0.05).ConclusionsAvailable evidence suggests that the use of absorbable barbed sutures to close the TKA surgical incision shortens the time to suture the joint capsule, reduces the incidence of acupuncture injury as well as the overall incidence of incision complications without increasing superficial infection, deep infection, and sterility. The incidence of redness and incision splitting has no significant effects on joint function at 3 months after surgery, however the incidence of suture fracture is higher. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, the above conclusions are required to be verified by more high-quality studies.