Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31530619›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Passive versus active intra-abdominal drainage following pancreatic resection: does a superior drainage system exist? A protocol for systematic review.

Lily Park, Laura Baker, Heather Smith, Alexandra Davies, Jad Abou Khalil, Guillaume Martel, Fady Balaa, Kimberly A Bertens

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lily ParkSchool of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0372-3525
Laura BakerGeneral Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4711-3742
Heather SmithGeneral Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Alexandra DaviesLibrary Services, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Jad Abou KhalilHepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Guillaume MartelHepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Fady BalaaHepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Kimberly A BertensHepatopancreaticobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada kbertens@toh.ca.
Ottawa Hospital · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) is the most common cause of major morbidity following pancreatic resection. Intra-abdominal drains are frequently positioned adjacent to the pancreatic anastomosis or transection margin at the time of surgery to aid in detection and management of CR-POPF. Drains can either evacuate fluid by passive gravity (PG) or be attached to a closed suction (CS) system using negative pressure. There is controversy as to whether one of these two systems is superior. The objective of this review is to identify and compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and resource utilisation associated with PG and CS drainage following pancreatic resections. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials will be searched from inception to April 2019, to identify interventional and observational studies comparing PG and CS drains following pancreatic resection. The primary outcome is POPF as defined by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula in 2017. Secondary outcomes include postoperative AE, resource utilisation (length of stay, return to emergency department, readmission and reintervention), time to drain removal and quality of life. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed independently, by two reviewers. A meta-analysis will be conducted if deemed statistically appropriate. Subgroup analysis by study design will be performed. Study heterogeneity will be calculated with the χ PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019123647.

Indexed as

AbdomenDevice RemovalDrainageHumansLength of StayPancreasPancreatic FistulaPostoperative ComplicationsQuality of LifeResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as Topicdrainsfistulapancreatic surgery

Identifiers

PMID31530619
PMCPMC6756355
OpenAlexW2974794074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.