ArticleCureus2019
Mandatory Laparotomy in Penetrating Abdominal Injuries with Omental Evisceration: Experience in a Major Trauma Center in the Philippines.
Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOmental evisceration due to abdominal stab injuries connotes peritoneal penetration and translates to around 70% risk of intra-abdominal injury. Such cases are being managed with mandatory laparotomy at the Philippine General Hospital. This study aims to review the patient profile and laparotomy outcomes in such cases.
methodsThis is a retrospective review of 98 consecutive laparotomies performed for patients with omental evisceration secondary to abdominal stab wounds between January 2004 to April 2018.
resultsAlmost all patients were male (99%) with a mean age of 32.1 years (range 14-70). The majority (81%) had a therapeutic laparotomy, and only 19 patients (19%) had a non-therapeutic laparotomy. The most commonly injured organs include the small bowel, stomach, colon, diaphragm, and liver. There was no significant difference in age, sex, duration of injury, systolic blood pressure and heart rate at presentation between the two groups. There were significantly more patients who presented with peritonism in the therapeutic laparotomy group compared to the non-therapeutic laparotomy group (82% vs 53%, p=0.005). Patients who presented with peritonism were six times more likely to have a therapeutic laparotomy. There was no significant difference between morbidity and mortality rates in the two groups. The length of hospital stay for the non-therapeutic laparotomy group was significantly shorter compared to the therapeutic laparotomy group (3.6 vs 5.7 days, p=0.006).
conclusionThe rate of therapeutic laparotomy remains to be significantly higher among patients with omental evisceration. Hence, omental evisceration, particularly those associated with peritonism, should continue to prompt operative management.
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.