Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17828407›Full record

ArticlePediatric surgery international2007

Recurrent neonatal gastro-intestinal problems after spontaneous intestinal perforation.

M S Drewett, D M Burge

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M S DrewettDepartment of Neonatal Medicine and Surgery, Princess Anne Hospital, Coxford Road, Southampton SO16 5YA, UK. melanie.drewett@suht.swest.nhs.uk
D M Burge

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To identify intestinal complications during the neonatal period following spontaneous isolated intestinal perforation (SIP). A retrospective case notes review was undertaken of all patients with a diagnosis of SIP, confirmed at laparotomy or post-mortem, admitted between January 2000 and January 2005. Patients with confirmed gastric perforation were excluded as were patients with proven necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) or suspected, but not confirmed, SIP. Seventeen patients, median gestation 27 weeks and median birth weight 780 g, were treated by drain alone (1), drain and later laparotomy (4) or primary laparotomy (12). Eight patients required enterostomy formation at primary laparotomy (1 jejunostomy, 1 colostomy and 6 ileostomy). Five babies died in the neonatal period and three later in the first year. Nine patients (53%) had ten subsequent episodes of intestinal pathology requiring surgical intervention between 5 and 136 days later comprising early recurrent isolated perforation (2), NEC (3), milk curd obstruction with or without perforation (3) and adhesion obstruction (2). Secondary surgery involved laparotomy in eight patients, five of whom required formation or re-formation of a stoma, and palliative drain insertion in one patient. Recurrent intestinal pathology requiring surgical intervention during the neonatal period occurred in 53% of babies with SIP. Surgeons and neonatologists should be aware that this group of patients are prone to further intestinal pathology.

Indexed as

DrainageEnterostomyFollow-Up StudiesHumansInfantInfant, NewbornIntestinal PerforationLaparotomyPrognosisRadiography, AbdominalRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesRupture, SpontaneousSurvival Rate

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.