SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011
Methods of decreasing infection to improve outcomes after liver resections.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The E-AHPBA-ESSO-Innsbruck consensus recommendations on peri- and postoperative management following liver resection.The British journal of surgery · 2025Guideline
- Intraoperative interventions for preventing surgical site infection: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Liver Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations.World journal of surgery · 2016Pooled it
- Trial
- A review of the current ERAS guidelines for liver resection, liver transplantation and pancreatoduodenectomy.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Review
- Risk factors associated with postoperative complications and prolonged postoperative length of stay after laparoscopic liver resection.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Article
- Evaluation of different antibiotic prophylaxis strategies for hepatectomy: A network meta-analysis.Medicine · 2019Article
- Prophylactic antibiotics and abdominal drainage in early recovery pathway for hepatectomy.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2018Article
- What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about probiotics as preventive interventions?Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicinaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfections cause both morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing liver resection. Various methods have been advocated to decrease the infectious complications after liver resection. We do not know if they are of any benefit to the patient or the health-care funder.
objectivesTo determine the benefits and harms of different interventions in decreasing the infectious complications and improving the outcomes after liver resection. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until August 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials that were performed to compare interventions aimed at decreasing the infectious complications after liver resection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently identified the trials and extracted the data. We analysed the data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects model using RevMan Analysis. For each outcome we calculated the risk ratio (RR), rate ratio, or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on available patient data analysis. MAIN
resultsWe included seven trials including 521 patients for this review. The sample size in the trials varied from 12 to 180 patients. All the trials were of high risks of systematic errors and of random errors. Four trials included patients who underwent liver resection only. In the remaining three trials, patients underwent combined liver resection with extrahepatic biliary resection resulting in a biliary enteric anastomosis. Four trials included only major liver resection. The remaining three trials included a mixture of major and minor liver resections. It appears that the proportion of cirrhotic patients in the trials was very low. The comparisons performed included whether antibiotics are necessary routinely during the peri-operative period of liver resection, the duration of antibiotics, the use of prebiotics and probiotics in the perioperative period, use of recombinant bactericidal-permeability increasing protein 21 (rBPI21), and the use of topical povidone iodine gel at the time of wound closure. Only one or two trials were included under each comparison. There was no significant differences in mortality or severe morbidity in any of the comparisons. Quality of life was not reported in any of the trials. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is currently no evidence to support or refute the use of any treatment to reduce infectious complications after liver resections. Further well designed trials with low risk of systematic error and low risk of random errors are necessary.
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.