Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31572804›Full record

ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2019

Evaluation of Surgical Site Infection in Mini-invasive Urological Surgery.

Jacopo Adolfo Rossi de Vermandois, Giovanni Cochetti, Michele Del Zingaro, Alberto Santoro, Mattia Panciarola, Andrea Boni, Matteo Marsico, Gianluca Gaudio, Alessio Paladini, Paolo Guiggi and 2 more

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

Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jacopo Adolfo Rossi de VermandoisUniversity of Perugia, Perugia, Outside U.S./Canada Italy.
Giovanni CochettiUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Michele Del ZingaroUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Alberto SantoroDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Specialties "Paride Stefanini";, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Mattia PanciarolaUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Andrea BoniUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Matteo MarsicoUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Gianluca GaudioUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Alessio PaladiniUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Paolo GuiggiUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
Roberto CirocchiDepartment of Digestive Surgery and Liver Unit, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Ettore MeariniUniversity of Perugia, Dept. of Surgical and Biomedical Sciences, Urology clinic, Perugia, Italy.
University of Perugia · ITSapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgical Site Infection (SSI) is the most frequent source of infection in surgical patients and the second most frequent cause of hospital-acquired infection. The primary aim of this prospective study was to compare SSI occurrences between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open urological surgery. Secondly, perioperative outcomes were evaluated in two different approaches. A consecutive group of 60 patients undergoing urological surgery were prospectively enrolled in a single high-volume center between May and October 2018. We included procedures that were performed by minimally invasive or traditional techniques. We evaluated and compared the incidence of SSI and perioperative outcomes in terms of intraoperative bleeding, post-operative complications, postoperative pain, patient satisfaction with the analgesic treatment, time to flatus, time of oral intake and mobilization, and length of hospital stay. The two groups were homogeneous with regard to demographic data. Superficial incisional SSIs were diagnosed in 10% of cases (3/30) in the second group and 0% in the first (p<0.05); space/organ SSIs developed in 4 patients, which were diagnosed by ultrasound scan and confirmed by abdominal CT: 1 patient (3.3%) in group 1 showed an infected lymphocele, whereas 1 case of infected lymphocele and 2 cases of pelvic abscess were detected in group 2 (10%, p<0.05). All the perioperative outcomes as well as were overall complication rate favored MIS (p<0.05). The use of minimally invasive techniques in urological surgery reduced the risk of SSI by comparison with a traditional approach. In addition, MIS was associated with better perioperative outcomes and a lower overall complication rate.

Indexed as

Hospital-acquired infectioninfectionMinimally invasiveSurgerySurgical SiteUrology

Identifiers

PMID31572804
PMCPMC6749724
OpenAlexW2973442882

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.