Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32755065›Full record

Trial reportInternational wound journal2020

A new surgical approach of direct perineal wound full-thick closure for perineal wound of abdominoperineal resection for rectal carcinoma: A prospective cohort trial.

Yong-Ping Yang, Ling-Yun Yu, Min Wang, Yu Mu, Jian-Nan Li, Feng-Jia Shang, Xian-Feng Wu, Tong-Jun Liu, Jian Shi

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yong-Ping YangThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6605-1343
Ling-Yun YuThe Department of Ear Nose and Throat Surgery, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Min WangThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Yu MuThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Jian-Nan LiThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Feng-Jia ShangThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Xian-Feng WuThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Tong-Jun LiuThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Jian ShiThe Department of General Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University · CNZero to Three · USJilin University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perineal wound complications after APR have high morbidity in the colorectal surgical department. Although some approaches have been figured out to solve this clinical focus, the outcomes are still not satisfied. Herein, this prospective comparative clinical trial has been designed to evaluate a new surgical procedure of direct perineal wound full-thick closure (DPWC), compared with conventional perineal wound closure (CPWC), with hopes of making wound healing with less complications. In addition, an evaluation of an incision negative wound pressure therapy, as another focus in this field, was also analysed in the DPWC group. A total of 44 participants in our department were recruited from March 2018 to March 2020, divided into two groups randomly, CPWC group and DPWC group. The patients' characteristics, such as age, gender, BMI, smoking, alcohol consumption, comorbidities, CEA level, and high-risk of invasion, were recorded without statistical significance between the CPWC group and DPWC group. After the same standard abdominal phase, these two groups were performed in different perineal phases. And then, operative and postoperative outcomes were analysed with different statistical methods. Data on wound healing time and length of stay in the DPWC group were shorter than those in the CPWC group (P < .05). Furthermore, cases of wound infection within 30 days in the DPWC group were also less than that in the CPWC group (P < .05). However, no difference was found between the incisional negative pressure wound therapy assisted group (NPA group) and non- incisional negative pressure wound therapy assisted group (non-NPA group). During this study, hypoalbuminemia, as an independent high-risk factor, impacted perineal wound healing. (P = .0271) In conclusion, DPWC is a new surgical approach, which can lead to a better outcome than DPWC, and it can be another surgical procedure for clinicians. In addition, hypoalbuminemia should be interfered for avoiding perineal wound complications.

Indexed as

CarcinomaProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsHumansPerineumPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesAPRdirect perineal wound full-thick closurehypoalbuminemia

Identifiers

PMID32755065
PMCPMC7754419
OpenAlexW3047307954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.