Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31997074›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2021

Comparison of Blumgart Anastomosis with Duct-to-Mucosa Anastomosis and Invagination Pancreaticojejunostomy After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Single-Center Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Riccardo Casadei, Claudio Ricci, Carlo Ingaldi, Laura Alberici, Emilio De Raffele, Francesco Minni

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Riccardo CasadeiDepartment of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. riccardo.casadei@unibo.it.
Claudio RicciDepartment of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Carlo IngaldiDepartment of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Laura AlbericiDepartment of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Emilio De RaffeleDepartment of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Francesco MinniDepartment of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
University of Bologna · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Blumgart anastomosis is a method of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) which combines the principle of duct-to-mucosa anastomosis with an invagination technique of the pancreas.

methodsRetrospective study involving consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic head cancer. Data predictive of pancreatic fistula and postoperative outcomes were collected. The patients were divided into three groups and were compared based on the type of pancreatic anastomosis performed: Blumgart anastomosis (BA), duct-to-mucosa anastomosis (DtoM), and invagination pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ). The primary endpoint was to determine the occurrence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). The secondary endpoints were to determine whether postoperative pancreatic fistula grade C (POPF C) and/or severe complications occurred as well as to determine the reoperation rate and 30- and 90-day mortality. A propensity score matching analysis was used.

resultsUsing propensity score matching (PSM), the occurrence of CR-POPF was not significantly different between the BA (21.6%) and the other pancreatic anastomoses (all 31.1%, DtoM = 27.0%; PJ = 35.1%). However, the BA significantly reduced (1) severe complications (0 versus 35.1%; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (0% versus 12.2%; P = 0.028) with respect to all anastomoses; (2) severe complications (0% versus 29.7%; P < 0.001), POPF grade C (0% versus 16.2%; P = 0.025), and reoperation (2.7% versus 16.2%; P = 0.056) with respect to DtoM; and (3) severe complications (0% versus 40.5%; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (0% versus 13.5%; P = 0.054) with respect to PJ.

conclusionsApplying the PSM analysis for the first time, the present study seemed to suggest that the BA succeeded in minimizing severe complications after PD.

Indexed as

PancreaticoduodenectomyPancreaticojejunostomyAnastomosis, SurgicalHumansMucous MembranePancreatic FistulaPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesPancreasPancreatic anastomosisPancreatic fistula

Identifiers

PMID31997074
OpenAlexW3003886752

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.