Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26292655›Full record

SynthesisHPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association2015

Central venous pressure and liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Michael J Hughes, Nicholas T Ventham, Ewen M Harrison, Stephen J Wigmore

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02954913 (Simultaneous RESEction of Colorectal Cancer With Synchronous Liver MeTastases), which is not on this map. Cited by 53 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

NCT02954913 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Simultaneous RESEction of Colorectal Cancer With Synchronous Liver MeTastases (RESECT): A Feasibility Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorHamilton Health Sciences CorporationRan2017 to 2021Enrolled41ConditionsColoRectal Cancer, Liver Metastases, Liver Metastasis Colon Cancer, SurgeryArmsSimultaneous Resection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 145 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael J HughesDepartment of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Nicholas T VenthamDepartment of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Ewen M HarrisonDepartment of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Stephen J WigmoreDepartment of Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Edinburgh Royal Infirmary · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA liver resection under low central venous pressure (CVP) has become standard practice; however, the benefits beyond a reduction in blood loss are not well reported. Moreover, the precise method to achieve CVP reduction has not been established. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RTCs) was performed to assess the effects of CVP on clinical outcome and to identify the optimum method of CVP reduction.

methodsEMBASE, Medline, PubMed and the Cochrane database were searched for trials comparing low CVP surgery with controls. The primary outcome was post-operative complications within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion rates and length of stay (LOS). Sub-group analysis was performed to assess the CVP reduction method on the outcome.

resultsEight trials were identified. No difference was observed in the morbidity rate between the high CVP and control groups [odds ratio (OR) = 0.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66, 1.40) P = 0.84, I(2) = 0%]. EBL [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -308.63 ml (95% CI -474.67, -142.58) P = < 0.001, I(2) = 73%] and blood transfusion rates [OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.44, 0.97) P = 0.040, I(2) = 37%] were significantly lower in the low CVP groups. Neither anaesthetic nor surgical methods of CVP reduction were associated with a reduced post-operative morbidity.

conclusionLow CVP surgery is associated with a reduction in EBL; however, this does not translate into an improvement in post-operative morbidity. The optimum method of CVP reduction has not been identified.

Indexed as

Blood Loss, SurgicalBlood TransfusionCentral Venous PressureHepatectomyHumansHypotension, Controlled

Identifiers

PMID26292655
PMCPMC4571753
OpenAlexW1942127540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.