Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25785194›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of surgical oncology2015

Peritoneal carcinomatosis: intraoperative parameters in open (coliseum) versus closed abdomen HIPEC.

E Halkia, A Tsochrinis, D T Vassiliadou, A Pavlakou, A Vaxevanidou, A Datsis, E Efstathiou, J Spiliotis

Open access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of surgical oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Predictors of Small Bowel Obstruction Post-Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

E Halkia1st Department of Surgical Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, 18537 Piraeus, Greece ; Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Unit, IASO General Hospital, 15562 Athens, Greece.
A Tsochrinis1st Department of Surgical Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, 18537 Piraeus, Greece.
D T Vassiliadou1st Department of Surgical Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, 18537 Piraeus, Greece.
A PavlakouDepartment of Anesthesiology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, 18537 Piraeus, Greece.
A VaxevanidouDepartment of Anesthesiology, Gennimatas General Hospital, 54635 Thessaloniki, Greece.
A DatsisDepartment of Surgery, General Hospital of Messolonghi, 30200 Messolonghi, Greece.
E Efstathiou1st Department of Surgical Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, 18537 Piraeus, Greece.
J Spiliotis1st Department of Surgical Oncology, Metaxa Cancer Hospital, 18537 Piraeus, Greece.
Metaxa Hospital · GRGeneral Hospital of Athens G. Genimatas · GRIASO General Hospital · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is associated with a poor prognosis. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC play an important role in well-selected patients with PC. The aim of the study is to present the differences in the intraoperative parameters in patients who received HIPEC in two different manners, open versus closed abdomen. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe population includes 105 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal, gastric, and ovarian cancer, sarcoma, mesothelioma, and pseudomyxoma peritonei. Group A (n = 60) received HIPEC using the open technique and Group B (n = 45) received HIPEC with the closed technique. The main end points were morbidity, mortality, and overall hospital stay.

resultsThere were two postoperative deaths (3.3%) in the open group versus no deaths in the closed group. Twenty-two patients in the open group (55%) had grade III-IV complications versus 18 patients in the closed group (40%). There are more stable intraoperative conditions in the closed abdomen HIPEC in CVP, pulse rate, and systolic pressure parameters.

conclusionsBoth methods are equal in the HIPEC procedures. Perhaps the closed method is the method of choice for frail patients due to more stable hemodynamic parameters.

Indexed as

Cytoreduction Surgical ProceduresHyperthermia, InducedAdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsChemotherapy, AdjuvantChemotherapy, Cancer, Regional PerfusionCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHemodynamicsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, IntraoperativePeritoneal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID25785194
PMCPMC4345051
OpenAlexW1988669896

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.