Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25408716›Full record

ReviewJournal of medicine and life2014

Secondary peritonitis - evaluation of 204 cases and literature review.

S K Doklestić, D D Bajec, R V Djukić, V Bumbaširević, A D Detanac, S D Detanac, M Bracanović, R A Karamarković

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medicine and life, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Surgical complications in colorectal cancer patients.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Predictors of 30-Day In-Hospital Mortality in Patients Undergoing Urgent Abdominal Surgery Due to Acute Peritonitis Complicated with Sepsis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019
    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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S K DoklestićClinic for Emergency Surgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
D D BajecSchool of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia; Clinic for Emergency Surgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
R V DjukićSchool of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia; Clinic for Emergency Surgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
V BumbaširevićSchool of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia; Department of Anesthesiology, Clinic for Emergency Surgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
A D DetanacHealth Center Novi Pazar, Serbia.
S D DetanacHealth Center Novi Pazar, Serbia.
M BracanovićClinic for Emergency Surgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
R A KaramarkovićSchool of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia; Clinic for Emergency Surgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.
Centar za Promociju Nauke · RS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

hypothesisEven at the beginning of the new millennium, secondary peritonitis presents a common life-threatening condition associated with high mortality and morbidity.

objectiveThis article comments on epidemiology, diagnosis and general principles of surgical management in patients with secondary peritonitis. METHODS AND

resultsThe demographic data, clinical findings and surgical outcome of 204 patients who had a confirmed generalized secondary peritonitis were analyzed retrospectively. Our approach was laparotomy, surgical control of contamination, antibiotic therapy and modern intensive care support. Acid peptic disease was the most common cause of perforation peritonitis 60 (29,41%), following by the perforated appendicitis 45 ( 22,06%). The faecal peritonitis and colon perforation were found in 42 patients (20,59%). The morbidity rate was 50%; 41 (40,2%) patients had more than one complication. The morbidity rate was significantly the highest in patients with colon perforation (n=38, 90%) (Hi-square=40,1; p<0,001). The overall mortality rate in our study was 8,82%. The mortality rate was significantly the highest among the patients with mesenteric ischemia in 4 patients (66,67%), followed by colon perforation in 10 cases (23,81%), and 4(6,6%) deaths due to gastro-duodenal perforation (Hi-square=45,7; p<0,001). DISCUSSION: This study has confirmed that the clinical presentation and outcome of the secondary peritonitis depend on duration of abdominal infection, the site of perforation and the general condition of the patient. Rapid surgical source control, modern intensive care and sepsis therapy may offer the chance of decreased morbidity and mortality of the intra-abdominal infections.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsColonHumansLaparotomyMorbidityMortalityPeritonitisRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial Agentsacute abdomenemergency surgerysecondary peritonitis

Identifiers

PMID25408716
PMCPMC4197493
OpenAlexW2173117457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.