ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2020
Drainage procedure for pancreatolithiasis: re-examination of the pancreatic duct diameter standard.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePancreatic duct decompression relieves pancreatic duct stone (PDS)-associated abdominal pain, though a consensus indication for the drainage procedure of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) is lacking. Moreover, major prognostic factors for postsurgical long-term pain relief and recurrence are largely unknown.
methodsThe clinical outcomes of 65 consecutive PDS patients undergoing surgery from 2008-2012 with 3+ years of follow-up were assessed.
resultsAt postsurgical follow-up (median, 4.5 years; range, 3-7 years; procedure: Partington, n = 32; Frey, n = 27; pancreatoduodenectomy, n = 3; distal pancreatectomy, n = 3), the early complication and complete stone clearance rates were 29.2% and 97%, respectively. Long-term, complete and partial pain relief were 93.9%, 83.1%, and 10.8%, respectively. The risk of pancreatic fistula was higher in the <8 mm group than in the >8 mm group (P < 0.05), and 80% of the pancreatic fistula cases occurred in the <8 mm group. A shorter pain duration (P = 0.007), smaller MPD diameter (P = 0.04), and lower Izbicki pain score (P < 0.001) predicted long-term pain relief. Pain recurrence after initial remission occurred in 5 patients and was only related to pain duration (P = 0.02). Stone recurrence and pancreatic exocrine functional and endocrine functional deterioration occurred in 2, 5, and 11 patients, respectively.
conclusionSurgery provides excellent stone clearance, long-term pain relief, and acceptable postoperative morbidity. Using 8 mm as the criterion for drainage surgery can minimize the postoperative pancreatic fistula risk. Individualized and timely surgical treatment may improve the effect of surgery.
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.