ArticleWorld journal of surgery2020
Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Staged Peritoneal Lavage for Secondary Peritonitis.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tricky acute mesenteric ischemia: what can we do?Gastroenterology report · 2025Review
- Transverse vs. median laparotomy in peritonitis and staged lavage: a single center case series.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSecondary peritonitis is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Data on the effect of staged re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy as a surgical option in the management of abdominal sepsis due to secondary peritonitis are limited and conflicting. Herein, we report the outcomes of patients undergoing staged peritoneal lavage (SPL) for secondary peritonitis in our department.
methodsThis is a single-center retrospective analysis of the data of patients undergoing SPL for secondary peritonitis. SPL was performed via either re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy. The simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II) was calculated at the time of the initial operation and for each SPL. The end points of interest included: the evolution of sepsis characterized by the SAPS II score, the mortality rate and the rate of definitive abdominal wall closure.
resultsThe data of 74 patients with a median age of 73 years requiring at least one SPL between 2012 and 2019 were analyzed. The median number of SPL performed was three (range 1-12). A sequential drop of SAPS II score from 41 at the initial procedure to 32 at the third SPL was documented. The overall mortality rate was 16.2%, definitive abdominal closure was achieved in all surviving patients and the median length of stay was 17.5d
conclusionStaged re-laparotomy or re-laparoscopy with peritoneal lavage may reduce the severity of peritonitis and reduce the risk of mortality in patients with abdominal sepsis. Maintaining the abdominal wall under constant retraction using a rigid mesh while creating an open abdomen is a crucial step in achieving definite abdominal wall closure. Thus, staged peritoneal lavage may be a good surgical option for selected patients with peritonitis.
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.