ArticleMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2018
[The treatment of acute secondary peritonitis : A retrospective analysis of the use of continuous negative pressure therapy].
Article in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with acute secondary peritonitis often need relaparotomies and open abdominal lavages. Continuous negative pressure therapy seems to be beneficial.
objectivesDoes the efficacy of the therapy depend on the continuous negative pressure system used? MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed in the Chirurgische Klinik der Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charité Campus Mitte, including all patients who underwent abdominal vacuum therapy between December 2013 and February 2015. Two different systems (ABThera®, KCI Medizinprodukte GmbH and Suprasorb® CNP Drainagefolie, Lohmann & Rauscher GmbH) were available for treatment.
resultsDuring the 14 month study period, 33 patients with acute secondary peritonitis were treated with abdominal negative pressure therapy. Vacuum therapy treatment was applied for a median of 4 days (range 0-22 days). Eight patients (24%) died during hospitalisation. After completion of intraabdominal vacuum therapy, direct fascial closure was feasible in 26 patients (79%). There were no differences concerning patient characteristics, duration of abdominal vacuum therapy, the possibility of direct fascial closure or morbidity and mortality with the two different systems used.
conclusionsAcute secondary peritonitis is associated with high morbidity. We achieved a lower mortality rate compared to prospective clinical trials using intraabdominal continuous negative pressure therapy. The effectiveness and cost efficiency of different therapy systems should be the topic of further research.
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.