ArticleBJS open2017
Surgery for massive splenomegaly.
Article in BJS open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Laparoscopic Splenectomy for Treatment of Splenomegaly: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.World journal of surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Laparoscopic treatment for a rare case of giant spleen with splenic arteriovenous fistula and giant vein aneurysm: multidisciplinary management and case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Impending splenic rupture as indicator of atypical chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A case report from Saudi Arabia.International journal of surgery case reports · 2023Article
- Elective splenectomy in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma: Does the size of the spleen affect surgical outcomes?Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2022Article
- Modern management of splenomegaly in patients with myelofibrosis.Annals of hematology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSplenectomy for massive splenomegaly (spleen weight more than 1·5 kg) is commonly believed to be hazardous and to provide poor palliation. The aim of this cohort study was to investigate these issues and examine the many definitions of massive splenomegaly to see whether a better tool might be proposed for preoperative evaluation of these patients.
methodsMorbidity and long-term outcomes were assessed in consecutive patients. Relief of pressure-volume-related symptoms and sustainable independence from transfusion in patients were used to ascertain the impact of splenectomy.
resultsSplenectomy was performed in 56 patients, mainly for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and myeloproliferative diseases. Median spleen weight was 2·3 (range 1·5-6·0) kg. Mortality at 180 days was zero, and the postoperative complication rate was 25 per cent (17 complications in 14 patients). At 2 years, relief of pain was maintained in 33 of 34 patients, with sustained independence from transfusion in 15 of 19 patients with anaemia and nine of 11 with thrombocytopenia. Spleen weight correlated negatively with BMI (P = 0·036).
conclusionSplenectomy for massive splenomegaly is safe and provides effective palliation. Provisional cut-off points relating to spleen size and BMI help to identify patients benefiting from a splenectomy, even those in a critical state.
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.