ArticleMedicine2019
Natural history and therapeutic strategies of post-pancreatoduodenectomy abdominal fluid collections: Ten-year experience in a single institution.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Intra-abdominal status for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula based on postoperative fluid collection and drain amylase levels after distal pancreatectomy.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Article
- The role of clinically relevant intra-abdominal collections after pancreaticoduodenectomy : Clinical impact and predictors. A retrospective analysis from a European tertiary centre.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- A newly improved POSSUM scoring system for prediction of morbidity in patients with pancreaticoduodenectomy.Translational cancer research · 2020Article
- The location of perianastomotic fluid collection predicts postoperative complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
TRIAL
designThe aim of this study was to identify independent risk factors for post-pancreatoduodenectomy (post-PD) abdominal fluid collections (AFCs) and evaluate our management protocol on it.
methodsA retrospective analysis of consecutive 2064 cases who underwent PD over the past decade in 1 single center was conducted. The patients were divided into AFCs and non-AFCs group. Univariable and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors of AFCs. The AFCs group was compared with the non-AFCs group with respect to the incidence of postoperative outcomes. The characteristics of AFCs were further analyzed in terms of clinical manifestations.
resultsTwo thousand sixty-four cases with pancreaticoduodenectomy were recruited and 15% of them were found AFCs. Diameter of main pancreatic duct ≤3 mm was found to be an independent predictor of AFCs (P < .001), along with soft pancreatic texture (P = .002), mesenterico-portal vein resection (P < .001), and estimated intraoperative blood loss >800 mL (P < .001). The incidence of mild complications was significantly higher in AFCs group than in non-AFCs group (34% vs 20%, P < .001), whereas no significant differences were noted in the rate of severe complications between these 2 groups (15% vs 15%, P = .939).
conclusionEnhanced drainage is recommended as an effective measure to decrease the incidence of severe complications caused by post-PD AFCs.
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.