ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Evaluation of diagnostic laparoscopy for penetrating abdominal injuries: About 131 anterior abdominal stab wound.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selective Nonoperative Management of Abdominal Stab Wounds in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Role of laparoscopy in management of patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Safety considerations in laparoscopic surgery: A narrative review.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe management of hemodynamically stable patients with anterior abdominal stab wounds (AASW) is debated. Mini-invasive techniques using laparoscopy and non-operative management (NOM) have reduced the rate of nontherapeutic laparotomies after AASW leading to unnecessary morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine with a systematic diagnostic laparoscopy of peritoneal penetration (PP), patients who do not require abdominal exploration in the management of stable patient with an AASW.
methodsAll patients with AASW were retrospectively recorded from 2006 to 2018. Criteria of inclusion were AASW patients who underwent a systematic diagnostic laparoscopy. Criteria of exclusion were patients with an evisceration, impaling, clinical peritonitis, and hemodynamic instability. If no PP was detected, laparoscopy was terminated. If defects of peritoneum were found, a laparotomy was performed looking for diagnosis and treatment of intra-abdominal injuries.
resultsOn 131 AASW patients, 35 underwent immediate emergency laparotomy, 96 underwent diagnostic laparoscopy, 47 were positive (PP) and had an intra-abdominal exploration by laparotomy, 32 (68.1%) had intra-abdominal injuries which required treatment. All patients with an intra-abdominal injury had a positive diagnostic laparoscopy. For the 49 patients with a negative laparoscopy, the mean hospital stay was 1.6 days with ambulatory care for some patients. No patient presented a delayed injury. Non-therapeutic laparotomy rate was 15.6%. For patients who did not have an intra-abdominal injury the morbidity rate was low (3%).
conclusionOur study shows that diagnostic laparoscopy was safe, with a low duration of hospitalization, a possible ambulatory care and had an excellent ability to screen the patients who did not need a abdominal exploration. This management can avoid many unnecessary laparotomies with an acceptable rate of negative laparotomy, without any delayed diagnosis of intra-abdominal injuries and with a low morbidity rate.
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.