Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31428852›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies.

Karina Tukanova, Sheraz R Markar, Sara Jamel, Alberto Vidal-Diez, George B Hanna

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karina TukanovaDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Sheraz R MarkarDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4507-6415
Sara JamelDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alberto Vidal-DiezDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
George B HannaDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK. g.hanna@imperial.ac.uk.
Imperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMinimal access surgery (MAS) has suggested improvements in clinical outcomes compared to open surgery in several abdominal elective and emergency surgeries. The aims of this study were to compare England with the United States in the utilisation of MAS and mortality from four common abdominal surgical emergencies.

methodsBetween 2006 and 2012, the rate of MAS and in-hospital mortality for appendicitis, incarcerated or strangulated abdominal hernia, small or large bowel and peptic ulcer perforation were compared between England and the United States. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to adjust for differences in baseline patient demographics.

results132,364 admissions in England were compared to an estimated 1,811,136 admissions in the United States. Minimal access surgery was used less commonly in England for appendicitis (odds ratio (OR) 0.27, 95% CI 0.267-0.278), abdominal hernia (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.15-0.17), small or large bowel perforation (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.32-0.35) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). In-hospital mortality was increased in England compared to the United States for all four conditions: appendicitis (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.66-2.68), abdominal hernia (OR 3.25, 95% CI 3.10-3.40), small or large bowel perforation (OR 3.88, 95% CI 3.76-3.99) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.94-3.25). In England, after adjustment for patient demographics, open surgery was associated with increased in-hospital mortality for abdominal hernia (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.26-2.71), small or large bowel perforation (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.87) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.91-2.82).

conclusionsMinimal access surgery was performed less commonly and in-hospital mortality was increased in England compared to the United States for common abdominal surgical conditions. Therefore, strategies to enhance adoption of MAS in emergency conditions in England need to be optimised and include appropriate patient selection and improved surgeon MAS training.

Indexed as

AbdomenAdultEmergenciesFemaleHumansMaleMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresAbdominal herniaAppendicitisBowel perforationEmergency surgeryMinimal access surgeryPeptic ulcer perforation

Identifiers

PMID31428852
PMCPMC7113203
OpenAlexW2969252558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.