Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27844112›Full record

ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2017

[Pancreaticogastrostomy: when and how?]

D Tittelbach-Helmrich, T Keck, U F Wellner

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

D Tittelbach-HelmrichDHBW Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Deutschland.
T KeckKlinik für Chirurgie, UKSH Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland. tobias.keck@uksh.de.
U F WellnerKlinik für Chirurgie, UKSH Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland.
Universitäres Kinderwunschzentrum Lübeck · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreaticojejunostomy and pancreaticogastrostomy are the two techniques for pancreatic anastomosis that are widely established for the reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreaticogastrostomy is the most recent and to date less frequently performed method, the history, techniques and indications of which are presented.

methodReview of the literature and current evidence.

resultsCurrent evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses does not demonstrate significant differences in complication rates or pancreatic function after pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy.

conclusionPancreaticogastrostomy is the technically less demanding procedure, offering at least the same level of safety as pancreaticojejunostomy. Minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing procedures provide new areas of application for this anastomotic technique.

Indexed as

Anastomosis, SurgicalFollow-Up StudiesGastrostomyHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPancreatectomyPancreatic Function TestsPancreatic NeoplasmsPancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticojejunostomyPostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateFistulaHemorrhagePancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticojejunostomySurgical anastomosis

Identifiers

PMID27844112
OpenAlexW2564456719

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.