Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24399524›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2014

Endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy in necrotising pancreatitis: a systematic review.

Sandra van Brunschot, Paul Fockens, Olaf J Bakker, Marc G Besselink, Rogier P Voermans, Jan-Werner Poley, Hein G Gooszen, Marco Bruno, Hjalmar C van Santvoort

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 63 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Interventions for necrotising pancreatitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sandra van BrunschotDepartment of OR/Clinical Surgical Research, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, s.vanbrunschot@pancreatitis.nl.
Paul Fockens
Olaf J Bakker
Marc G Besselink
Rogier P Voermans
Jan-Werner Poley
Hein G Gooszen
Marco Bruno
Hjalmar C van Santvoort

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe performed a systematic review to assess the outcome of endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy in necrotising pancreatitis with additional focus on indication, disease severity, and methodological quality of studies.

designWe searched the literature published between January 2005 and June 2013. Cohorts, including patients with (infected) necrotising pancreatitis, undergoing endoscopic necrosectomy were included. Indication, disease severity, and methodological quality were described. The main outcomes were mortality, major complications, number of endoscopic sessions, and definitive successful treatment with endoscopic necrosectomy alone.

resultsAfter screening 581 papers, 14 studies, including 455 patients, fulfilled the eligibility criteria. All included studies were retrospective analyses except for one randomized, controlled trial. Overall methodological quality was moderate to low (mean 5, range 2-9). Less than 50 % of studies reported on pre-procedural severity of disease: mean APACHE-II score before intervention was 8; organ failure was present in 23 % of patients; and infected necrosis in 57 % of patients. On average, four (range 1-23) endoscopic interventions were performed per patient. With endoscopic necrosectomy alone, definitive successful treatment was achieved in 81 % of patients. Mortality was 6 % (28/460 patients) and complications occurred in 36 % of patients. Bleeding was the most common complication.

conclusionsEndoscopic transluminal necrosectomy is an effective treatment for the majority of patients with necrotising pancreatitis with acceptable mortality and complication rates. It should be noted that methodological quality of the available studies is limited and that the combined patient population of endoscopically treated patients is only moderately ill.

Indexed as

DebridementEndoscopy, Digestive SystemHumansPancreatectomyPancreatitis, Acute NecrotizingTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24399524

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.