Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35228508›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of transplantation2022

Techniques for Closing the Abdominal Wall in Intestinal and Multivisceral Transplantation: A Systematic Review.

Allana C Fortunato, Rafael S Pinheiro, Cal S Matsumoto, Rubens M Arantes, Vinicius Rocha-Santos, Lucas S Nacif, Daniel R Waisberg, Liliana Ducatti, Rodrigo B Martino, Luiz Carneiro-D'Albuquerque and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of transplantation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Allana C FortunatoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Rafael S PinheiroDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Cal S MatsumotoMedStar Georgetown Transplant Institute, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6364-1927
Rubens M ArantesDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Vinicius Rocha-SantosDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Lucas S NacifDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-7059-3978
Daniel R WaisbergDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Liliana DucattiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Rodrigo B MartinoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Luiz Carneiro-D'AlbuquerqueDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Wellington AndrausDepartment of Gastroenterology, Clinics Hospital of the University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Universidade de São Paulo · BRMedStar Georgetown University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Short bowel syndrome is the most common etiology of intestinal failure, resulting from either resections of different intestinal segments or a congenital condition. Due to the absence or considerable reduction of intestinal loops in the abdominal cavity, patients with short bowel syndrome present with atrophy and muscle retraction of the abdominal wall, which leads to loss of abdominal domain and elasticity. This complication is an aggravating factor of intestinal transplantation since it can prevent the primary closure of the abdominal wall. A vast array of surgical techniques to overcome the challenges of the complexity of the abdominal wall have been described in the literature. The aim of our study was to review the modalities of abdominal wall closure in intestinal/multivisceral transplantation. Our study consisted of a systematic review following the methodological instructions described in the PRISMA guidelines. Duplicate studies and studies that did not meet the criteria for the systematic review were excluded, especially those without relevance and an explicit relationship with the investigated theme. After this step, 63 articles were included in our study. The results obtained with these techniques have been encouraging, but a high incidence of wound complications in some reports has raised concerns. There is no consensus among transplantation centers regarding which technique would be ideal and with higher success rates and lower rates of complications.

Indexed as

Organ TransplantationWound Closure TechniquesAbdominal WallHumansIncidenceIntestines

Identifiers

PMID35228508
PMCPMC8897964
OpenAlexW4214541267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.