ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2008
Management of infected pancreatic necrosis.
Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibiotic therapy for prophylaxis against infection of pancreatic necrosis in acute pancreatitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Pancreatic Necrosectomy through Sinus Tract Endoscopy.Clinical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Therapeutic effects of electroacupuncture at ST36 acupoint on sodium-taurocholate-induced severe acute pancreatitis.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2014Article
- Nutrition, inflammation, and acute pancreatitis.ISRN inflammation · 2013Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging for acute pancreatitis.World journal of radiology · 2010Article
- Influence of dexamethasone on the expression levels of P-selectin protein in multiple organs of rats with severe acute pancreatitis.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The past two decades have seen major advances in the understanding and clinical management of acute pancreatitis, yet it still lacks a specific treatment, and management is largely supportive and reactive. Surgery is seeing a diminishing role in the early phase of acute pancreatitis but still predominates in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis--the most lethal complication. This review focuses on recent literature but begins with an account of the evolution of infected necrosis management, which serves to place current treatment into context. Although surgeons initially emphasized less invasive approaches to pancreatic necrosis, they now compete with new techniques developed by pioneering physicians, radiologists, and interventional endoscopists. Clinicians adopting the new techniques will need to emulate the dedication and commitment that the current pioneers demonstrate. Although new techniques are still evolving, they should be evaluated against existing standards of treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.