Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31825525›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2019

Management of drainage for malignant ascites in gynaecological cancer.

Chumnan Kietpeerakool, Siwanon Rattanakanokchai, Nampet Jampathong, Jatupol Srisomboon, Pisake Lumbiganon

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Quality of Life in Palliative Care: A Systematic Meta-Review of Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2024
    Article
  4. Time-efficient implantable catheters for draining malignant ascites in terminal cancer patients.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chumnan KietpeerakoolKhon Kaen University, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, 123 Mitraparb Road, Amphur Muang, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 40002.
Siwanon RattanakanokchaiKhon Kaen University, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Public Health, 123 Mittraphap Rd. Nai-Muang, Muang District, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 40002.
Nampet JampathongKhon Kaen University, Cochrane Thailand, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Jatupol SrisomboonFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 110 Intawaroros Road, Muang, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 50200.
Pisake LumbiganonKhon Kaen University, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, 123 Mitraparb Road, Amphur Muang, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 40002.
Khon Kaen University · THChiang Mai University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAscites is the accumulation of fluid within the abdominal cavity. Most women with advanced ovarian cancer and some women with advanced endometrial cancer need repeated drainage for ascites. Guidelines to advise those involved in the drainage of ascites are usually produced locally and are generally not evidence-based. Managing drains that improve the efficacy and quality of the procedure is key in making recommendations that could improve the quality of life (QoL) for women at this critical period of their lives.

objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and adverse events of different interventions for the management of malignant ascites drainage in the palliative care of women with gynaecological cancer. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to 4 November 2019. We checked clinical trial registries, grey literature, reports of conferences, citation lists of included studies, and key textbooks for potentially relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women with malignant ascites with gynaecological cancer. If studies also included women with non-gynaecological cancer, we planned to extract data specifically for women with gynaecological cancers or request the data from trial authors. If this was not possible, we planned to include the study only if at least 50% of participants were diagnosed with gynaecological cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, evaluated the quality of the included studies, compared results, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using Cochrane methodology. MAIN

resultsIn the original 2010 review, we identified no relevant studies. This updated review included one RCT involving 245 participants that compared abdominal paracentesis and intraperitoneal infusion of catumaxomab versus abdominal paracentesis alone. The study was at high risk of bias in almost all domains. The data were not suitable for analysis. The median time to the first deterioration of QoL ranged from 19 to 26 days in participants receiving paracentesis alone compared to 47 to 49 days among participants receiving paracentesis with catumaxomab infusion (very low-certainty evidence). Adverse events were only reported among participants receiving catumaxomab infusion. The most common severe adverse events were abdominal pain and lymphopenia (157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no data on the improvement of symptoms, satisfaction of participants and caregivers, and cost-effectiveness. AUTHORS'

conclusionsCurrently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the most appropriate management of drainage for malignant ascites among women with gynaecological cancer, as there was only very low-certainty evidence from one small RCT at overall high risk of bias.

Indexed as

AscitesDrainageEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansOvarian NeoplasmsQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID31825525
PMCPMC6953277
OpenAlexW2994846648

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.