Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32161986›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2020

Centralisation of Pancreatoduodenectomy in India: Where Do We Stand?

Rajesh S Shinde, Saneya Pandrowala, Sunil Navalgund, Esha Pai, Manish S Bhandare, Vikram A Chaudhari, Richard Sullivan, Shailesh V Shrikhande

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Rajesh S ShindeGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Saneya PandrowalaGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Sunil NavalgundGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Esha PaiGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Manish S BhandareGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Vikram A ChaudhariGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India.
Richard SullivanInstitute of Cancer Policy, King's College London, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Shailesh V ShrikhandeGastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Service, Division of Cancer Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400012, India. shailushrikhande@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe volume-outcome relationship dictates that high-volume centres lead to improved patient outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). We conducted a retrospective review to fathom the situation in India for PD and whether referral to high-volume centres would make a positive impact.

methodA systematic literature search in MEDLINE was performed, and all articles published from Indian centres from 01.03.2008 to 30.11.2019 were scrutinised. Any series with less than 20 patients, case reports, abstracts, unpublished data and personal communications were excluded.

resultsA total of 36 unique series including 6226 patients from 24 institutes across India were identified. Amongst the 24 institutes, 2 institutes reported less than 10 cases/year, 11 reported 10-25 cases/year and 11 reported ≥26 cases/year. Overall perioperative morbidity was 42.4%, 43.4% and 41% for centres doing <10, 10-25 and ≥26 cases/year, respectively. Operative mortality also improved with increasing number of cases/year (5.1% vs. 6.6% vs. 3.2%, respectively).

conclusionWith increasing volume of cases per year, trend towards improved PD outcomes is observed. To optimise the use of healthcare facilities, it would be pragmatic to consider building an organised referral system for complex surgeries to deliver unsurpassed patient care with maximum utilisation of the available healthcare infrastructure.

Indexed as

PancreaticoduodenectomyHospitals, High-VolumeHospitals, Low-VolumeHumansIndiaIntraoperative ComplicationsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePostoperative ComplicationsReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

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.