ArticleMedicine2017
Plastic wound protectors decreased surgical site infections following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Best Evidence for Each Surgical Step in Minimally Invasive Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023Review
- Left lower transverse incision versus Pfannenstiel-Kerr incision for specimen extraction in laparoscopic sigmoidectomy: a match pair analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2020Article
- Prevalence and predictors of surgical site infections after bowel resection for Crohn's disease: the role of dual-ring wound protector.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic surgery is widespread and safe for the management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Although the use of standard surgical techniques can prevent perioperative wound infections, surgical site infections (SSIs) remain an unresolved complication in laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. The present study investigated the ability of plastic wound protectors applied to the extraction incision during the externalized portion of the procedure to reduce the rate of infection in laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. We completed a retrospective review of the medical records of patients who underwent nonemergent laparoscopic-assisted between January 2015 and June 2016. Outcomes for patients with and without the use of a wound protector were compared. A total of 109 patients were included in this study. There was 1 patient in the wound protector group (n = 57) and 7 in the nonwound protector group (n = 52) who developed a wound infection at the colon extraction site (P = .02). Furthermore, the average postoperative hospital stay in the wound protector group was shorter compared to the nonwound protector group (7.47 ± 0.24 vs 8.73 ± 0.54 days, P = .03). In conclusion, this study indicates that the use of a plastic wound protector during laparoscope-assisted colectomy does reduce postoperative wound infection rates, and the wound protectors are beneficial for specimen extraction and digestive tract reconstruction.
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.