Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35193601›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2022

Assessing clinical outcomes of modified laparoscopic gastrostomy in children: a case control study.

Hussein Naji, Aafia Gheewale, Ebtesam Safi, Faiz Tuma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. 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

4 authors.

Hussein NajiMediclinic Parkview Hospital, Dubai, UAE.
Aafia GheewaleMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE. aafia.gheewale@students.mbru.ac.ae.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4056-0120
Ebtesam SafiMohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, UAE.
Faiz TumaCentral Michigan University College of Medicine, Mount Pleasant, MI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith gastrostomy becoming a common surgical procedure within the pediatric population surgeons continued to introduce modifications on the procedure to overcome some of the challenges and minimize complications. Modified U-stitches laparoscopic gastrostomy is gaining favor in some centers including the center of this study. Hence, this study was conducted to evaluate and compare its outcomes.

methodsEighty-nine gastrostomy procedures performed between 2013 and 2020 were reviewed to evaluate the surgical outcomes of a novel modified U-stitches laparoscopic gastrostomy (MLG) to the standard laparoscopic gastrostomy (LG) in children. The main outcome measured is the rate of postoperative complications encompassing dislodgement of gastrostomy button, leak around button, local infection, and development of granulation tissue post-surgery which is compared between the two population groups.

resultsThe rate of leak around the button was found to be significantly less in the MLG (4%) compared to (15%) in the traditional LG approach with a p-value of 0.03. However, the overall complication rate for MGL is 63%; while it is 73% for LG.

conclusionsThe modified U-stitches laparoscopic gastrostomy has a lower rate of complications in comparison to the standard laparoscopic gastrostomy making it a preferred technique for gastrostomy placement in children.

Indexed as

GastrostomyLaparoscopyCase-Control StudiesChildHumansInfantIntubation, GastrointestinalPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesButtonChildrenLaparoscopic gastrostomyPostoperative complicationsSeldinger techniqueU suture technique

Identifiers

PMID35193601
PMCPMC8862243

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.