Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21073823›Full record

ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2011

Back to basics--cutting the cord on umbilical infections.

Alistair Sharples, David McArthur, Kate McNamara, John Lengyel

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2011. 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, top 89% of its field
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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alistair SharplesUniversity Hospital of North Staffordshire, Stoke on Trent, UK. alsharples@yahoo.co.uk
David McArthur
Kate McNamara
John Lengyel
Royal Stoke University Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurgical site infections (SSIs) are a significant cause of postoperative morbidity with laparoscopic surgery associated with lower SSI rates. However, a departmental change in our unit to increased laparoscopic colorectal surgery resulted in increased wound infection rates at umbilical specimen extraction sites, the cause of which we attempted to elucidate. SUBJECTS AND

methodsProspectively collected data over an 18-month period (April 2008 to September 2009) for laparoscopic colorectal operations in a busy teaching hospital were retrospectively analysed, focusing on operation performed, whether pre-operative skin cleansing was employed, nature of specimen extraction excision, and rate of umbilical wound infection. Comparison was made with open colorectal procedures performed in the preceding year.

resultsIn total, 275 laparoscopic colorectal operations were performed. Over the first 8 months there was a significant increase in infection rates when compared with open procedures over a similar time period (23.5% vs 8.0%; P = 0.0001). Changing practice to use pre-operative skin cleansing and an incision that skirted around, as opposed to traversing, the umbilicus reduced umbilical infection rates significantly from 23.5% to 11.6% (P = 0.01). Patients undergoing right hemicolectomy benefitted more (reduction of 30.0% to 6.9%; P = 0.04) than those undergoing anterior resection (26.8% vs 15.6%, P = 0.13).

conclusionsUmbilical incisions, when extended for specimen extraction, are particularly prone to infection following colorectal surgery but rates can be reduced by simple measures such as pre-operative umbilical cleansing and avoidance of the umbilicus in the incision, without the need for drastic and costly changes in technique or antibiotic prophylaxis.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedColonFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedRectumRetrospective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionUmbilicusYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21073823
PMCPMC3293304
OpenAlexW2015791630

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.