Observational studyMedicine2017
Feasibility and safety of emergency laparoscopic partial splenectomy: A retrospective analysis.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic Partial Splenectomy: A Systematic Review.World journal of surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Retrospective evaluation of anatomical laparoscopic single-port partial splenectomy guided by three-dimensional CT reconstruction planning for hereditary spherocytosis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic partial splenectomy: analysis of perioperative indications from different vascular subtypes and improvement of surgical approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic partial splenectomy in a patient with splenic hemangioma after distal gastrectomy for a neuroendocrine tumor.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open partial splenectomy in children and adolescents.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic surgery for splenic injuries in the era of non-operative management: current status and future perspectives.Surgery today · 2021Review
- Laparoscopic partial splenectomy with temporary occlusion of the trunk of the splenic artery in fifty-one cases: experience at a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Partial splenectomy: A case series and systematic review of the literature.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2018Article
- Laparoscopic splenectomy after trauma: Who, when and how. A systematic review.Journal of minimal access surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increased awareness of asplenia-related life-threatening complications has led to the development of parenchyma sparing splenic resections in past few years. The aim of this study is to retrospectively analyze the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic partial splenectomy (LPS) in selected emergency patients.From January 2013 to December 2015, there were 46 emergency patients, diagnosed with splenic rupture, admitted in our department. Selection criteria for LPS: (1) Preoperative CT scan revealed single pole rupture without spleen pedicle injury; (2) BP>90/60 mm Hg and heart rates <120 bpm; (3) No sigh of multiple organ injury. Eventually, LPS was performed in 21 patients (Group LPS), while laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) was performed in 20 patients (Group LS).The main cause of splenic rupture was traffic accident, followed by blunt injury and high falling injury. Abdominal CT scan showed the mean longitudinal diameter of spleen of group LPS was 14.2 ± 1.8 cm (range 12-17 cm), while the size of remnant spleen was 5.5 ± 1.2 cm. Between 2 groups, operation time (LPS: 122.6 ± 17.2 min vs LS: 110.5 ± 18.7 minutes, P = .117), and intraoperative blood loss (LPS: 174 ± 22 mL vs LS: 169 ± 29 mL, P = .331) were similar. There were 2 patients suffered subsequent unstable vital sign altering during mobilization when performing LPS. Conversion to LS (2/21, 9.52%) was decided and successfully completed. Although there was no patient suffered postoperative OPSI or thrombocytosis events in both groups after 6-month follow-up, the mean platelets and leukocyte count were significantly lower in group LPS. Splenic regrowth was evaluated in 20 patients of group LPS. And the mean regrowth of splenic volume reached 19% (10%-26%).Due to its minimal invasive effect and functional splenic tissue preservation, LPS may be a safe and feasible approach for emergency patients. And prospective trials with clear inclusion criteria are needed to proof the benefit of LPS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.