Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31892788›Full record

ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons

O-Ring Protector in Prevention of SSIs in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery.

Gabriella Teresa Capolupo, Sara Lauricella, Gianluca Mascianà, Chiara Caricato, Silvia Angeletti, Massimo Ciccozzi, Roberto Coppola, Marco Caricato

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

Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Best Evidence for Each Surgical Step in Minimally Invasive Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Gabriella Teresa CapolupoDepartment of Geriatric Surgery Unit, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Sara LauricellaDepartment of Geriatric Surgery Unit, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Gianluca MascianàDepartment of Geriatric Surgery Unit, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Chiara CaricatoDepartment of Geriatric Surgery Unit, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Silvia AngelettiUnit of Clinical Laboratory Science, Department of Medicine, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Massimo CiccozziUnit of Medical Statistic and Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Rome, Italy.
Roberto CoppolaGeneral Surgery Unit, Campus Bio-Medico of Rome University, Italy.
Marco CaricatoMD Program, School of Medicine, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, City, State, Country.
Università Campus Bio-Medico · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical-site infections (SSIs) remain a serious complication of colorectal surgery, causing a significant financial burden to the health care system. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the use of an O-ring retractor can be effective in preventing the incidence of wound infections after elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

methodsA retrospective case-control study from January 2014 to June 2018 was performed. Data were analyzed from a retrospective colorectal database. SSI was defined according to criteria published by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and analyzed as a primary outcome.

resultsThree hundred twelve consecutive patients (n = 312) were enrolled in our study. Among them, 158 patients (Group A) in which an O-ring retractor device was used during surgery was compared with a control group of 154 patients (Group B) in which an O-ring retractor device was not used. Primary outcome was to determine SSIs rates among the 2 groups. No statistically differences were observed with regard to baseline characteristics between both groups. A total of 9 patients (5.69%) and 24 (15.58%) with SSIs were identified in Group A and B, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14-0.72;

conclusionsSSIs infections rates were significantly higher in patients in which an O-ring retractor device was not used. This study suggests that the use of a wound protector device can be considered for routine use in elective colorectal surgery.

Indexed as

AgedCase-Control StudiesColonFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleRectumRetrospective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionAlexis®ColorectalPreventionSurgical site infectionWound protector/retractor

Identifiers

PMID31892788
PMCPMC6924502
OpenAlexW2997384027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.