Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27545699›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2016

Evidence-Based Surgical Treatments for Chronic Pancreatitis.

Jörg Kleeff, Christian Stöß, Julia Mayerle, Lynne Stecher, Matthias Maak, Peter Simon, Ulrich Nitsche, Helmut Friess

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. A Network Meta-analysis of Surgery for Chronic Pancreatitis: Impact on Pain and Quality of Life.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Review
  10. Review
  11. [Chronic pancreatitis: limitations of the applicability of unicentric studies].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Jörg KleeffDepartment of General, Visceral, and Pediatric Surgery, Düsseldorf University Hospital, Düsseldorf; Department of Sur gery, The Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom; and Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medi cine, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom, Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Department of Internal Medicine A, Faculty of Medicine, University of Greifswald, Institute of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen.
Christian Stöß
Julia Mayerle
Lynne Stecher
Matthias Maak
Peter Simon
Ulrich Nitsche
Helmut Friess
Klinikum rechts der Isar · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIf conservative treatment of chronic pancreatitis is unsuccessful, surgery is an option. The choice of the most suitable surgical method can be difficult, as the indications, advantages, and disadvantages of the available methods have not yet been fully documented with scientific evidence.

methodsIn April 2015, we carried out a temporally unlimited systematic search for publications on surgery for chronic pancreatitis. The target parameters were morbidity, mortality, pain, endocrine and exocrine insuffi - ciency, weight gain, quality of life, length of hospital stay, and duration of urgery. Differences between surgical methods were studied with network meta-analysis, and duodenum-preserving operations were compared with partial duodenopancreatectomy with standard meta-analysis.

resultsAmong the 326 articles initially identified, 8 randomized controlled trials on a total of 423 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The trials were markedly heterogeneous in some respects. There was no significant difference among surgical methods with respect to perioperative morbidity, pain, endocrine and exocrine insufficiency, or quality of life. Duodenumpreserving procedures, compared to duodenopancreatectomy, were associated with a long-term weight gain that was 3 kg higher (p <0.001; three trials), a mean length of hospital stay that was 3 days shorter (p = 0.009; six trials), and a duration of surgery that was 2 hours shorter (p <0.001; five trials).

conclusionDuodenum-preserving surgery for chronic pancreatitis is superior to partial duodenopancreatectomy in multiple respects. Only limited recommendations can be given, however, on the basis of present data. The question of the best surgical method for the individual patient, in view of the clinical manifestations, anatomy, and diagnostic criteria, remains open.

Indexed as

Operative TimeAdultComorbidityEvidence-Based MedicineExocrine Pancreatic InsufficiencyFemaleHospital MortalityHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPancreatectomyPancreatitis, ChronicPostoperative ComplicationsPrevalenceRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID27545699
PMCPMC5527832
OpenAlexW2517822759

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.