Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35014692›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Antecolic versus retrocolic reconstruction after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Felix J Hüttner, Rosa Klotz, Alexis Ulrich, Markus W Büchler, Pascal Probst, Markus K Diener

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Felix J HüttnerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Ulm University Hospital , Ulm , Germany.
Rosa KlotzDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Alexis UlrichDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery , Lukas Hospital Neuss , Neuss , Germany.
Markus W BüchlerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Pascal ProbstDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Markus K DienerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery , Medical Center, University of Freiburg , Freiburg , Germany.
Heidelberg University · DELukaskrankenhaus · DEUniversity Hospital Ulm · DEUniversity Medical Center Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreatic cancer remains one of the five leading causes of cancer deaths in industrialised nations. For adenocarcinomas in the head of the gland and premalignant lesions, partial pancreaticoduodenectomy represents the standard treatment for resectable tumours. The gastro- or duodenojejunostomy after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy can be reestablished via either an antecolic or retrocolic route. The debate about the more favourable technique for bowel reconstruction is ongoing.

objectivesTo compare the effectiveness and safety of antecolic and retrocolic gastro- or duodenojejunostomy after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy. SEARCH

methodsIn this updated version, we conducted a systematic literature search up to 6 July 2021 to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library 2021, Issue 6, MEDLINE (1946 to 6 July 2021), and Embase (1974 to 6 July 2021). We applied no language restrictions. We handsearched reference lists of identified trials to identify further relevant trials, and searched the trial registries clinicaltrials.govand World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered all RCTs comparing antecolic with retrocolic reconstruction of bowel continuity after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy for any given indication to be eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the identified references and extracted data from the included trials. The same two review authors independently assessed risk of bias of included trials, according to standard Cochrane methodology. We used a random-effects model to pool the results of the individual trials in a meta-analysis. We used odds ratios (OR) to compare binary outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. MAIN

resultsOf a total of 287 citations identified by the systematic literature search, we included eight randomised controlled trials (reported in 11 publications), with a total of 818 participants. There was high risk of bias in all of the trials in regard to blinding of participants and/or outcome assessors and unclear risk for selective reporting in six of the trials. There was little or no difference in the frequency of delayed gastric emptying (OR 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.09; eight trials, 818 participants, low-certainty evidence) with relevant heterogeneity between trials (I AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere was low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggesting that antecolic reconstruction after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy results in little to no difference in morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, or quality of life. Due to heterogeneity in definitions of the endpoints between trials, and differences in postoperative management, future research should be based on clearly defined endpoints and standardised perioperative management, to potentially elucidate differences between these two procedures. Novel strategies should be evaluated for prophylaxis and treatment of common complications, such as delayed gastric emptying.

Indexed as

PancreatectomyPancreaticoduodenectomyHumansLength of StayPancreatic FistulaPostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID35014692
PMCPMC8750387
OpenAlexW4220825935

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.