ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery
A comparison of clinical outcomes between endoscopic and open surgery to repair neonatal diaphragmatic hernia.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Clinicodemographic profile and outcomes of congenital diaphragmatic hernia with sac: experience of a paediatric referral centre.Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Surgical management of the diaphragmatic defect in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a contemporary review.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2024Review
- Thoracoscopic surgery for congenital diaphragmatic hernia in neonates: Should it be the first choice?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Simple and safe thoracoscopic repair of neonatal congenital diaphragmatic hernia by a new modified knot-tying technique.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2019Article
- Congenital right diaphragmatic defects: Our institutional experience.African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPSObservational
- Congenital diaphragmatic hernia in neonates: Open versus thoracoscopic repair.African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPSArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacies of open versus endoscopic surgery in the treatment of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and investigate the feasibility and safety of endoscopic surgery as an alternative to open surgery in these cases. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed from June 2002 to February 2014. A total of 59 cases were attempted. The neonates were divided into either an endoscopic or open surgery group. The pre-, intra- and post-operative data on the neonates were analysed, and the surgery-related complications, survival rates and recurrence rates were compared between the two groups.
resultsDemographic characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. Compared with open group, the hospital stay and post-operative mechanical ventilation time were significantly shorter, while surgery duration was significantly longer in the endoscopic surgery group. The recurrence rate was higher and the survival rate was lower in the endoscopic surgery group with no statistically significant and the recurrence rate has decreased over the past 5 years.
conclusionsWe have demonstrated that the endoscopic surgery is safe and effective for repairing CDH. The endoscopic surgery is a minimally invasive procedure with fast post-operative recovery and a good cosmetic outcome.
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.