Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29505561›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2018

Association between institutional procedural preference and in-hospital outcomes in laparoscopic surgeries; Insights from a retrospective cohort analysis of a nationwide surgical database in Japan.

Hiroaki Miyata, Masaki Mori, Norihiro Kokudo, Mitsukazu Gotoh, Hiroyuki Konno, Go Wakabayashi, Hisahiro Matsubara, Toshiaki Watanabe, Minoru Ono, Hideki Hashimoto and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Hiroaki MiyataNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
Masaki MoriThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tokyo, Japan.
Norihiro KokudoJapan Surgical Society, Tokyo, Japan.
Mitsukazu GotohThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroyuki KonnoThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tokyo, Japan.
Go WakabayashiThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tokyo, Japan.
Hisahiro MatsubaraJapan Surgical Society, Tokyo, Japan.
Toshiaki WatanabeJapan Surgical Society, Tokyo, Japan.
Minoru OnoNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideki HashimotoNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroyuki YamamotoNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiraku KumamaruNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
Shun KohsakaNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
Tadashi IwanakaNational Clinical Database, Tokyo, Japan.
The University of Tokyo · JPKeio University · JPHamamatsu University School of Medicine · JPJapan Surgical Society · JPNational Center for Global Health and Medicine · JPOsaka Prefectural Medical Center · JPOsaka University · JPSaitama Municipal Hospital · JPThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the use of laparoscopic surgeries (LS) and the association between its performance and hospitals' preference for LS over open surgeries. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: LS is increasingly used in many abdominal surgeries, albeit both with and without solid guideline recommendations. To date, the hospitals' preference (LS vs. open surgeries) and its association with in-hospital outcomes has not been evaluated.

methodsWe enrolled patients undergoing 8 types of gastrointestinal surgeries in 2011-2013 in the Japanese National Clinical Database. We assessed the use of LS and the occurrences of surgery-related morbidity and mortality during the study period. Further, for 4 typical LS procedures, we assessed the hospitals' preference for LS by modeling the propensity to perform LS (over open surgeries) from patient-level factors, and estimating each institution's observed/expected (O/E) ratio for LS use. Institutions with O/E>2 were defined as LS-dominant. Using hierarchical logistic regression models, we assessed the association between LS preference and in-hospital outcomes.

resultsAmong 1,377,118 patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures in 2,336 participating hospitals, use of LS increased in all 8 procedures (35.1% to 44.7% for distal gastrectomy (DG), and 27.5% to 43.2% for right hemi colectomy (RHC)). Those operated at LS-dominant hospitals were at an increased risk of operative death (OR 1.83 [95%CI, 1.37-2.45] for DG, 1.79 [95%CI, 1.43-2.25] for RHC) compared to standard O/E level hospitals (0.5≤O/E<2.0).

conclusionsLS use widely increased during 2011-2013 in Japan. Facilities with higher than expected LS use had higher mortality compared to other hospitals, suggesting a need for careful patient selection and dissemination of the procedure.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualModels, BiologicalRegistriesColectomyFemaleGastrectomyHumansJapanLaparoscopyMalePractice Guidelines as TopicRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID29505561
PMCPMC5837082
OpenAlexW2791102126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.