ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2020
Comparison of laparoscopic surgery versus traditional laparotomy for the treatment of emergency patients.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block with combined dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone on the stress and immune function.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Intestinal perforation secondary to ingested chicken bone: case report and literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Characterizing Research Hotspots and Trends in Simulation-Based Training in Obstetrics and Gynecology 1961-2024: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- Findings Favor Haptics Feedback in Virtual Simulation Surgical Education: An Updated Systematic and Scoping Review.Surgical innovation · 2024Article
- A rare case of descending colonic volvulus presenting as large bowel obstruction 19 years after sigmoidectomy and descending colorectal anastomosis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Open versus laparoscopic technique in peptic ulcus perforation, how effective are score systems?Single-center experience and literature review.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2022Review
- A Rare Case of an Exploratory Laparotomy to Treat a Liver Abscess Secondary to Foreign Body Ingestion.Cureus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic gastrointestinal emergency surgery and postoperative complications.
methodsData for 604 patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery between January 2013 and December 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Treatment efficacy and postoperative complications were compared between 300 patients (control group) undergoing traditional laparotomy and 304 patients (observation group) undergoing laparoscopic surgery.
resultsClinical features were significantly better in the observation group than in the control group, including duration of surgery (59.12 ± 10.31 minutes
conclusionsFor patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery, laparoscopic surgery resulted in better clinical outcomes than traditional laparotomy without incurring additional costs. The potential clinical benefits of emergency laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery warrant further study.
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.