Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35372168›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2022

Necessity of Prophylactic Extrapleural Chest Tube During Primary Surgical Repair of Esophageal Atresia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Martin Riis Ladefoged, Steven Kwasi Korang, Simone Engmann Hildorf, Jacob Oehlenschlæger, Susanne Poulsen, Magdalena Fossum, Ulrik Lausten-Thomsen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Martin Riis LadefogedCopenhagen Trial Unit, Department 7812, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Steven Kwasi KorangCopenhagen Trial Unit, Department 7812, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Simone Engmann HildorfDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jacob OehlenschlægerDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Susanne PoulsenDepartment of Neonatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Magdalena FossumDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ulrik Lausten-ThomsenDepartment of Neonatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Esophageal atresia is corrected surgically by anastomosing and recreating esophageal continuity. To allow the removal of excess fluid and air from the anastomosis, a prophylactic and temporary intraoperative chest tube (IOCT) has traditionally been placed in this area during surgery. However, whether the potential benefits of this prophylactic IOCT overweigh the potential harms is unclear. Objective: To assess the benefits and harms of using a prophylactic IOCT during primary surgical repair of esophageal atresia. Data Sources: We conducted a systematic review with a meta-analysis. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2021, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, CINAHL, and Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-(Web of Science). Search was performed from inception until December 3rd, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCT) assessing the effect of a prophylactic IOCT during primary surgical repair of esophageal atresia and observational studies identified during our searches for RCT. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers screened studies and performed data extraction. The certainty of the evidence was assessed by GRADE and ROBINS-I. PROSPERO Registration: A protocol for this review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021257834). Results: We included three RCTs randomizing 162 neonates, all at overall "some risk of bias." The studies compared the placement of an IOCT vs. none. The meta-analysis did not identify any significant effect of profylacitic IOCT, as confidence intervals were compatible with no effect, but the analyses suggests that the placement of an IOCT might lead to an increase in all-cause mortality (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.76-3.65; three trials), serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.58-2.00; three trials), intervention-requiring pneumothorax (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.28-9.50; two trials), and anastomosis leakage (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.63-4.40). None of our included studies assessed esophageal stricture or pain. Certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Conclusions: Evidence from RCTs does not support the routine use of a prophylactic IOCT during primary surgical repair of esophageal atresia.

Indexed as

chest tubeesophageal atresianeonatespediatric surgerytracheoesophageal fistula

Identifiers

PMID35372168
PMCPMC8971748

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.