Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30611270›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2019

Modified duct-to-mucosa versus conventional pancreaticoenterostomy for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching analysis.

Tianchong Wu, Yuehua Guo, Jiangang Bi, Shuwang Liu, Yusheng Guo, Shiyun Bao

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tianchong WuDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Second Medical College, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, Guangdong Province, China.
Yuehua GuoDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Second Medical College, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, Guangdong Province, China.
Jiangang BiDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Second Medical College, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, Guangdong Province, China.
Shuwang LiuDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Second Medical College, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, Guangdong Province, China.
Yusheng GuoDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Second Medical College, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, Guangdong Province, China.
Shiyun BaoDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Second Medical College, Shenzhen People's Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, Guangdong Province, China. drbsy@sina.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2941-9043
Jinan University · CN

Funding

Urban Management Bureau of Shenzhen Municipality JCYJ20180209114645254
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) remains the most common neopathy after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). An ideal pancreaticoenterostomy (PE) which can effectively reduce the incidence of CR-POPF and its potential neopathy is needed. We aimed to assess the efficacy of our modified duct-to-mucosa PE in the PD.

methodFrom January 2011 to December 2017, 233 consecutive patients with PD were retrospectively included from Shenzhen People's Hospital. After propensity score matching (PSM), there were 82 patients in both the modified duct-to-mucosa PE group (group A) and the conventional end-to-side inserting PE group (group B), respectively. The clinical course and the incidence of postoperative neopathy were compared between groups. Logistic regression method was utilized to analyze the association between PE approach and CR-POPF.

resultsThe PE time was shorter in group A (9.3 ± 1.8 min vs. 21.5 ± 2.8 min, P < 0.001). The group A had significantly lower incidence of severe neopathy (Clavien-Dindo grade > II) [7.3% (5/82) vs. 17.1% (14/82), P = 0.028] and incidence of CR-POPF [1.2% (1/82) vs. 19.5% (12/82), P < 0.001] than the group B. Our modified duct-to-mucosa PE technique was associated with a reduced risk for CR-POPF (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.02-0.57]; P = 0.009) as compared with the conventional end-to-side inserting PE.

conclusionCompared with conventional end-to-side inserting PE, our modified duct-to-mucosa PE technique can effectively reduce the incidences of postoperative neopathy and CR-POPF.

trial registrationResearchregistry3877 . Registered 24 March 2018. Retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Postoperative ComplicationsAgedBile Duct NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedMucous MembranePancreatic NeoplasmsPancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticojejunostomyPrognosisPropensity ScorePancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticoenterostomyPostoperative pancreatic fistula

Identifiers

PMID30611270
PMCPMC6320616
OpenAlexW2911355029

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.