ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Use of minimally invasive surgery for the management of hollow viscus traumatic injuries.
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.
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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nationwide analysis of minimally invasive surgical approach in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic treatment for colonic injuries following penetrating trauma: A feasible option in a surgical department of Sub-Saharan Africa.Trauma case reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this study is to assess surgical outcomes following the initial use of laparoscopy versus laparotomy when managing patients with hollow viscus injuries due to trauma.
methodsUsing the database from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program we identified all patients from 2015-2017 with ICD-10 Diagnosis codes for hollow viscus trauma. Types of procedures were identified by ICD-10 PCS codes. Patient outcomes were stratified by major trauma(ISS > 15) and minor trauma. Continuous variables were compared by ANOVA and categorical variables compared by Chi-Square. Analysis performed using STATA 16.
resultsWe identified 16,284 patients that matched inclusion criteria within the study time frame. Of those, 1986 patients received a surgical intervention, 1911(96%) were open and 75(4%) were laparoscopic. In blunt trauma there were 106 diagnostic procedures, 87(82%) were open and 19(18%) were laparoscopic. There were 574 therapeutic procedures, 543(95%) were open and 31(5%) were laparoscopic. In penetrating trauma there were 223 diagnostic procedures, 215(96%) were open and 8(4%) were laparoscopic. There were 1039 therapeutic procedures for penetrating trauma, 1023(98%) were open and 16(2%) were laparoscopic. For minor trauma, mean length of stay(days) after open surgery was 5 while for laparoscopy it was 2 (p = 0.04). There were 203 complications noted in the open group and 7 in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.19). For major trauma, mean length of stay(days) after open surgery was 5 and 6 for laparoscopy p = 0.54). There were 242 complications in the open group and 1 in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.07). There was no noted significant difference noted in the disposition at discharge in either group in both major and minor trauma.
conclusionsFor those that required surgery for hollow viscous injury, laparoscopy appeared to be safe, had less adverse outcomes and was underutilized, particularly when only a diagnostic procedure was required.
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.