Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22744638›Full record

Trial reportJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2012

Randomized controlled single-center trial comparing pancreatogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after partial pancreatoduodenectomy.

Ulrich F Wellner, Olivia Sick, Manfred Olschewski, Ulrich Adam, Ulrich T Hopt, Tobias Keck

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ulrich F WellnerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, University of Freiburg, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106 Freiburg, Germany.
Olivia Sick
Manfred Olschewski
Ulrich Adam
Ulrich T Hopt
Tobias Keck
University of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this single-center randomized trial was to compare the perioperative outcome of pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatogastrostomy (PG) vs pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ).

methodsRandomization was done intraoperatively. PG was performed via anterior and posterior gastrotomy with pursestring and inverting seromuscular suture; control intervention was PJ with duct-mucosa anastomosis. The primary endpoint was postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

resultsFrom 2006 to 2011, n = 268 patients were screened and n = 116 were randomized to n = 59 PG and n = 57 PJ. There was no statistically significant difference regarding the primary endpoint (PG vs PJ, 10 % vs 12 %, p = 0.775). The subgroup of high-risk patients with a soft pancreas had a non-significantly lower pancreatic fistula rate with PG (PG vs PJ, 14 vs 24 %, p = 0.352). Analysis of secondary endpoints demonstrated a shorter operation time (404 vs 443 min, p = 0.005) and reduced hospital stay for PG (15 vs 17 days, p = 0.155). Delayed gastric emptying (DGE; PG vs PJ, 27 vs 17 %, p = 0.246) and intraluminal bleeding (PG vs PJ, 7 vs 2 %, p = 0.364) were more frequent with PG. Mortality was low in both groups (<2 %).

conclusionsOur randomized controlled trial shows no difference between PG and PJ as reconstruction techniques after partial pancreatoduodenectomy. POPF rate, DGE, and bleeding were not statistically different. Operation time was significantly shorter in the PG group.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnastomosis, SurgicalFemaleGastrostomyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPancreasPancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticojejunostomyRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID22744638
OpenAlexW2066266237

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.