Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34964910›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2022

Caudate lobe amebic abscesses: percutaneous image-guided aspiration or drainage.

Tanya Yadav, Ranjan K Patel, Akash Bansal, Navojit Chatterjee, Yashwant Patidar, Amar Mukund

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Amebic liver abscess: An update.World journal of hepatology · 2024
    Review
  3. Amebic liver abscess byWorld journal of clinical cases · 2022
    Review
  4. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tanya YadavDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, India.
Ranjan K PatelDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, India.
Akash BansalDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, India.
Navojit ChatterjeeDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, India.
Yashwant PatidarDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, India.
Amar MukundDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, India. dramarmukund@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8905-5889
Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmebic liver abscess is the most common type of liver abscess on a worldwide basis, with caudate lobe being a relatively uncommon location for its occurrence. Abscess in caudate lobe of liver is often considered a challenging location for image-guided percutaneous drainage due to its difficult-to-access location along with close relationship with major vessels at porta hepatis. PURPOSE: This study aims to demonstrate safety and efficacy of percutaneous drainage for caudate lobe amebic abscess. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn this retrospective study, hospital database was electronically searched for patients having caudate lobe amebic abscess that underwent percutaneous catheter drainage/needle aspiration (PCD/PNA) between January 2016 and January 2021. The etiology, risk factors, microbiology, complications, different approaches for PCD/PNA, and their outcome were studied and reported.

resultsOf 30 patients having caudate lobe amebic abscess treated with PCD/PNA, solitary caudate lobe abscess was seen in 29, whereas one patient had more than one abscesses in caudate lobe. Contained and free intraperitoneal rupture of the abscess were seen in 9 (30%) and one patient, respectively. Ten (32%) patients had associated vascular thrombosis, while 2 patients were found to have abscess-biliary communication. Twenty-six (86.7%) patients were treated with PCD, while remaining 4 (13.3%) with PNA. On Univariate analysis, factors such as volume, multilocularity, and contained rupture of the abscess were found to be significantly increasing the duration of percutaneous drainage (PCD), while only multilocularity (p value 0.007) continued to show statistical significance on Multivariate analysis. Venous thrombosis and duration of catheter drainage were the two factors found to have significant influence on the length of hospital stay on Univariate as well as Multivariate analysis (p value 0.05 and 0.001, respectively). The rates of catheter manipulation were also significantly higher in patients with abscess showing complex internal configuration (heteroechoic contents and/or multilocularity). Technical and clinical success rates of 100% and 96.7% were achieved through percutaneous interventions (PCD/PNA), despite the complex location of abscesses and associated complications, with no incidence of vascular injury.

conclusionLiver abscess in caudate lobe can be accessed by different routes for percutaneous drainage, despite being surrounded by large vessels and its deep location, without major complications. Thus, PCD/PNA may be considered as a first-line therapy for the management of caudate lobe amebic abscesses in adjunct to medical therapy.

Indexed as

DrainageLiver Abscess, AmebicHumansRetrospective StudiesSuctionCaudate lobeLiver abscessPercutaneous interventionPorta hepatisUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID34964910
OpenAlexW4200183110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.