ArticleLangenbecks Archiv fur Chirurgie1991
[Etiology and consequences of postoperative wound infection].
Article in Langenbecks Archiv fur Chirurgie, 1991. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Splenectomy--a strictly aseptic intervention?].Langenbecks Archiv fur Chirurgie · 1994Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of postoperative wound infection ranges between 4.6% and 36% after gastrointestinal operations respectively. To evaluate the factors which influence the postoperative wound infection we prospectively analyzed our patients between 1/1989 and 1/1990. 444 patients from three general surgical units of our clinic entered this study. The overall wound infection rate was 6.3%. We classified the patients into 3 operative groups: Group I: subcutaneous operations; Group II: intraabdominal operations without opening the GI-tract; Group III: gastrointestinal operations. Wound infection rate in group I was 1.8%, in group II 7.3% and in group III 13.7%. The differences were highly significant. Both univariate (chi 2-test) as well as a multivariate (Cox-Model) analysis were done. We figured out that classification of patients (p = 0.000), operation time (p = 0.009), operating room (p = 0.000), intensive care unit (p = 0.026), long-term antibiotic prophylaxis (p = 0.001), subcutaneous haematoma (p = 0.000) and length of closed drainage time (p = 0.001) are of significant value. In the Cox model the classification of patients into 3 groups surpassed all the other factors. Postoperative hospital stay was lengthened in patients with wound infection significantly (p = 0.0025).
Indexed as
Identifiers
1870366What 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.