Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33023558›Full record

Trial reportBMC surgery2020

Preventing clinically relevant pancreatic fistula with combination of linear stapling plus continuous suture of the stump in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Takeshi Aoki, Doaa A Mansour, Tomotake Koizumi, Kazuhiro Matsuda, Tomokazu Kusano, Yusuke Wada, Tomoki Hakozaki, Kodai Tomioka, Takahito Hirai, Tatsuya Yamazaki and 4 more

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Pancreatic Fistula after Distal Pancreatectomy with Stapler.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    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

14 authors.

Takeshi AokiDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan. takejp@med.showa-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0503-2525
Doaa A MansourDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Tomotake KoizumiDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Kazuhiro MatsudaDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Tomokazu KusanoDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Yusuke WadaDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Tomoki HakozakiDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Kodai TomiokaDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Takahito HiraiDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Tatsuya YamazakiDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Makoto WatanabeDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Koji OtsukaDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Ahmed Elewa Abbas GahinDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.
Masahiko MurakamiDivision of Gastroenterological and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Showa University, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 1428666, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreatic fistula is one of the serious complications for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy, which leads to significant morbidity. The aim of our study is to compare linear stapling closure plus continuous suture with linear stapling closure alone during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in terms of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate.

methodsTwenty-two patients underwent LDP at our institution between 2011 and 2013. Twelve patients had linear stapling closure with peri-firing compression (LSC) alone compared with ten patients who had linear stapling closure, peri-firing compression plus continuous suture (LSC/CS) for stump closure of remnant pancreas in LDP. Biochemical leak and clinically relevant POPF were compared between both groups.

resultsPOPF occurred in 4 of 12 (33.3%) patients with linear stapling closure while no patient developed a clinically relevant POPF in the triple combination of linear stapling, peri-firing compression plus continuous suture group (p = 0.043).1 patient (8.3%) in the LSC group and 5 patients (50%) in the LSC/CS group had evidence of a biochemical leak. There were no significant differences in operative time (188.3 vs 187.0 min) and blood loss (135 vs. 240 g) between both groups but there was a significantly of shorter length of hospital stay (11.9 vs. 19.9 days) in LSC/CS group (p = 0.037). There was no mortality in either group.

conclusionsThe triple combination of linear stapling, peri-firing compression plus continuous suture in LDP has effectively prevented occurrence of clinically relevant ISGPF POPF.

trial registrationThe study was retrospectively registered September 30, 2019 at Showa University Ethics Committee as IRB protocol numbers 2943.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPancreatectomyPancreatic FistulaAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPancreasPostoperative ComplicationsSurgical StaplingSuturesSuture TechniquesContinuous suture for stump closureLaparoscopic distal pancreatectomyPancreatic fistulaPeri-firing compressionStapler closure

Identifiers

PMID33023558
PMCPMC7541328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.