ArticleScientific reports2019
Postoperative bleeding and biliary leak after liver resection: A cohort study between two different fibrin sealant patches.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A standardized workflow for precision liver resection: systematic review of integrated 3D visualization, indocyanine green fluorescence, and augmented reality navigation.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Development and Evaluation of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients Undergoing Hepatectomy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- [Management of postoperative bile leaks].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- A Prospective Analysis of the Effects of a Powder-Type Hemostatic Agent on the Short-Term Outcomes after Liver Resection.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of Hemopatch® versus Surgicel® Original to control mild and moderate liver bleeding.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- The safety and efficacy of Glubran 2 as biliostatic agent in liver resection.Infectious agents and cancer · 2021Article
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
Different topical products have been tested in liver resection to get a control of bleeding. This study compares the effectiveness and complications between two haemostatic agents Tachosil versus Hemopatch. A cohort study including patients who underwent liver resection since November 2014 to April 2016 was conducted. The study was performed in a single institution. Demographic variables, intraoperative characteristics and postoperative complications were analysed. A total of 92 patients (50 in Tachosil group and 42 in Hemopatch group) were included. No differences were found in patients who required intraoperative (Tachosil 6 (12%) vs Hemopatch 2 (4.8%); p = 0.28) and postoperative (Tachosil 4 (8%) vs Hemopatch 3 (7.1%); p = 0.87) blood transfusion. There were no differences in length of hospital stay (Tachosil 7.02 ± 4.1 days vs Hemopatch 7.63 ± 9.1; p = 0.67). Overall postoperative complications were similar between both patches (Tachosil 21 (42%) vs Hemopatch 14 (33%); p = 0.48). No differences were found in specific complications, however Hemopatch showed a higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess 5 (11.9%) and vs 0 (0%) p = 0.01.In this study no differences have been found between Hemopatch and Tachosil in the effectiveness and overall postoperative complication after liver resection, although Hemopatch shows a higher incidence of intraabdominal abscess. Further studies are necessary to confirm these findings.
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.