Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29736661›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2018

Abdominal Drainage and Amylase Measurement for Detection of Leakage After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer.

Judith P M Schots, Misha D P Luyer, Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04227951 (A Randomised Multicentre Controlled Trial of Gastrectomy With or Without Prophylactic Abdominal Drainage. The Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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.

NCT04227951 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Randomised Multicentre Controlled Trial of Gastrectomy With or Without Prophylactic Abdominal Drainage. The Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy Trial (ADiGe Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata VeronaRan2019 to 2023Enrolled404ConditionsGastric CancerArmsAvoid drain placement, Drain placement
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Judith P M SchotsDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. judith.schots@catharinaziekenhuis.nl.
Misha D P LuyerDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Grard A P NieuwenhuijzenDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLCatharina Ziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the value of daily measurement of drain amylase for detecting leakage in gastric cancer surgery.

methodsThis was a retrospective analysis including all patients who underwent a gastrectomy for gastric cancer. From January 2013 until December 2015, an intra-abdominal drain was routinely placed. Drain amylase was measured daily. Receiver operator characteristic curves were created to assess the ability of amylase to predict leakage. Sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predictive value of amylase in drain fluid were determined. Leakage of the gastrojejunostomy or esophagojejunostomy, enteroenterostomy, duodenal stump, or pancreas was diagnosed by CT scan, endoscopy, or during re-operation. From January 2016 until April 2017, no drain was inserted. Surgical outcome and postoperative complications were compared between both groups.

resultsMedian drain amylase concentrations were higher for each postoperative day in patients with leakage. The optimal cutoff value was 1000 IU/L (sensitivity 77.8%, specificity 98.2%, negative predictive value 96.6%). Sixty-seven consecutive procedures were performed with a drain and 40 procedures without. No differences in group characteristics were observed except for gender. Fourteen patients (13.1%) had a leakage. The incidence and severity of leakage were not different between the patients with and without a drain. There was no significant difference in time to diagnosis (1 vs. 0 days; p 0.34), mortality rate (7.5 vs. 2.5%; p 0.41), and median length of hospital stay (9 days in both groups; p 0.46).

conclusionDaily amylase measurement in drain fluid does not influence the early recognition and management of leakage in gastric cancer surgery.

Indexed as

Abdominal CavityAgedAged, 80 and overAmylasesAnastomotic LeakBody FluidsDrainageFemaleGastrectomyHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleReoperationRetrospective StudiesROC CurveAmylasesAmylaseAnastomotic leakageDrain fluidGastric cancerGastric surgery

Identifiers

PMID29736661
OpenAlexW2801411512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.