Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25799130›Full record

Trial reportCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie2015

In search of the best reconstructive technique after pancreaticoduodenectomy: pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy.

Jan Grendar, Jean-François Ouellet, Francis R Sutherland, Oliver F Bathe, Chad G Ball, Elijah Dixon

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Surgical management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a narrative review.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023
    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.

Jan GrendarThe Division of General Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.
Jean-François OuelletCHU de Québec, Pavillon Hôspital de l'Enfant-Jesus, Quebec, Que.
Francis R SutherlandThe Division of General Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.
Oliver F BatheThe Division of General Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.
Chad G BallThe Division of General Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.
Elijah DixonThe Division of General Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt has been suggested that pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) is a safer reconstruction than pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ), resulting in lower morbidity, including lower pancreatic leak rates and decreased postoperative mortality. We compared PJ and PG after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

methodsA randomized clinical trial was designed. It was stopped with 50% accrual. Patients underwent either PG or PJ reconstruction. The primary outcome was the pancreatic fistula rate, and the secondary outcomes were overall morbidity and mortality. We used the Student t, Mann-Whitney U and χ(2) tests for intention to treat analysis. The effect of randomization, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, soft pancreatic texture and use of pancreatic stent on overall complications and fistula rates was calculated using logistic regression.

resultsOur trial included 98 patients. The rate of pancreatic fistula formation was 18% in the PJ and 25% in the PG groups (p = 0.40). Postoperative complications occurred in 48% of patients in the PJ and 58% in the PG groups (p = 0.31). There were no significant predictors of overall complications in the multivariate analysis. Only soft pancreatic gland predicted the occurrence of pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 5.89, p = 0.003).

conclusionThere was no difference in the rates of pancreatic leak/fistula, overall complications or mortality between patients undergoing PG and and those undergoing PJ after PD.

Indexed as

PancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticojejunostomyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnastomosis, SurgicalFemaleHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPancreasPancreatic Fistula

Identifiers

PMID25799130
PMCPMC4447507
OpenAlexW214757487

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.