Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33170476›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2021

Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Following Prior Upper Abdominal Surgery (Pancreatectomy and Prior Surgery).

Mushegh A Sahakyan, Tore Tholfsen, Dyre Kleive, Sheraz Yaqub, Airazat M Kazaryan, Trond Buanes, Bård Ingvald Røsok, Knut Jørgen Labori, Bjørn Edwin

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.

Mushegh A SahakyanThe Intervention Center, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway. sahakyan.mushegh@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4815-7694
Tore TholfsenDepartment of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Dyre KleiveDepartment of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Sheraz YaqubDepartment of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Airazat M KazaryanThe Intervention Center, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway.
Trond BuanesDepartment of Research & Development, Division of Emergencies and Critical Care , Oslo University Hospital , Oslo, Norway.
Bård Ingvald RøsokDepartment of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Knut Jørgen LaboriDepartment of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.
Bjørn EdwinThe Intervention Center, Oslo University Hospital, Pikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposePrevious abdominal surgery can be a risk factor for perioperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures. Today, distal pancreatectomy is increasingly performed laparoscopically. This study investigates the consequences of prior upper abdominal surgery (PUAS) for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

methodsPatients who had undergone LDP from April 1997 to January 2020 were included. Based on the history and type of PUAS, these were categorized into three groups: minimally invasive (I), open (II), and no PUAS (III). To reduce possible confounding factors, the groups were matched in 1:2:4 fashion based on age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiology grade.

resultsAfter matching, 30, 60, and 120 patients were included in the minimally invasive, open and no PUAS groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of intraoperative outcomes. Postoperative morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay were similar. Open PUAS was associated with higher Comprehensive Complication Index (33.7 vs 20.9 vs 26.2, p = 0.03) and greater proportion of patients with ≥ 2 complications (16.7 vs 0 vs 6.7%, p = 0.02) compared with minimally invasive and no PUAS. Male sex, overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m

conclusionsPUAS does not impair the feasibility and safety of LDP as its perioperative outcomes are largely comparable to those in patients without PUAS. However, open PUAS increases the burden and severity of postoperative complications.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPancreatic NeoplasmsHumansLength of StayMalePancreatectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAbdomenLaparoscopyMorbidityPancreatectomySurgery

Identifiers

PMID33170476
PMCPMC8275495
OpenAlexW3106190977

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.