ArticleGynecologic oncology2012
Utility of closed suction pelvic drains at time of large bowel resection for ovarian cancer.
Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensitive MRD Detection from Lymphatic Fluid after Surgery in HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024Article
- Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Surgery in Ovarian Cancer: Drainage, Stoma Utility and Risk Factors.Cancers · 2022Article
- Evidence to support a drain-free strategy in kidney transplantation using a retrospective comparison of 500 consecutively transplanted cases at a single center.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- Enhanced recovery after surgery: implementing a new standard of surgical care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2019Review
- Guidelines for postoperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations--Part II.Gynecologic oncology · 2016Article
- Multiple large bowel resections: potential risk factor for anastomotic leak.Gynecologic oncology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo test the hypothesis that the use of closed suction pelvic drains placed at time of large bowel resection (LBR) for ovarian cancer (OC) decreases morbidity following anastomotic leak (AL).
methodsConsecutive cases of LBR for OC between 01/01/1994 and 06/20/2011 were retrospectively identified. Drains were routinely used until bowel movement. AL was defined as: 1) feculent fluid from drains/wound/vagina, 2) radiographic evidence of AL, or 3) AL found at reoperation. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum, Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used.
results43 cases met inclusion criteria. AL was characterized by method of diagnosis as follows: change in drain output only (DO, n=8); change in drain output associated with ambiguous clinical signs/symptoms (D-SSX, n=11); or clinical signs/symptoms only (SSX, n=24). The sensitivity of drains in diagnosing AL was 50%. Time to diagnosis was earlier in DO/D-SSX (median 7 vs. 11 days, P=0.003), however, no significant differences were observed in rates of reoperation, length of stay, time to chemotherapy (TTC), and 30- and 90-day mortality between DO/D-SSX and SSX. Comparing cases where no drains were placed (n=5) vs. those with drain (n=38), we observed no differences in outcomes. TTC though statistically significant (47 vs. 59 days, P=0.023) was not clinically significant.
conclusionsThough a change in drain output correlated with earlier diagnosis, this did not appear to impact overall outcomes. We did not find strong evidence supporting routine prolonged drainage after LBR for OC. Additionally, absence of change in drain output does not rule out presence of AL.
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.