Trial reportLancet (London, England)2022
Algorithm-based care versus usual care for the early recognition and management of complications after pancreatic resection in the Netherlands: an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial.
Trial report in Lancet (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
71 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 161 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preventing pancreatic fistula following pancreatectomy: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.BJS open · 2026Pooled it
- Hospital costs associated with complications following pancreatoduodenectomy: systematic review.BJS open · 2026Pooled it
- International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026Guideline
- Impact of frailty on outcomes of pancreatic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Mobile applications in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- New technique of end to side two layered and stented duct to mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with omental wrapping during Whipple operation.BMC surgery · 2025Trial
- Preoperative stereotactic radiotherapy to prevent pancreatic fistula in high-risk patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (FIBROPANC): prospective multicentre phase II single-arm trial.The British journal of surgery · 2025Trial
- Fully Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Surgery.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2023Trial
- Perioperative H-FABP and Its Association with Postoperative Morbidity Following Pancreatic Resection: A Prospective Observational Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- When and how can in-hospital deaths following pancreaticoduodenectomy be prevented?Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Postoperative hyperamylasemia-an early warning signal after distal pancreatectomy.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2026Article
- Combined Preoperative Risk Score Including sCD40, Leukocytes, and BMI Predicts Pancreas-Specific Complications After Pancreatic Cancer Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and pancreatic surgery in the 21st century: triumphs, turning points, and unresolved challenges.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Cost-analysis of Implementing Robot-assisted Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy.Annals of surgery · 2026Article
- Postpancreatectomy acute pancreatitis after distal pancreatectomy: tri-institutional international cohort.BJS open · 2026Article
- MKNet-family architectures for auto-segmentation of the residual pancreas after pancreatic resection: a deep learning comparative study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- The breaking point in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: factors influencing conversion thresholds and early postoperative outcomes in a tertiary referral center.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Delayed gastric emptying after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy: the Transatlantic Robot Pancreas Consortium (TROPANC).Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Article
- A predictive model for postoperative hemorrhage in patients with clinically relevant pancreatic fistula following minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
44 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection.
methodsWe did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low-medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671.
findingsFrom Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·48, 95% CI 0·38-0·61; p<0·0001). Among patients treated according to the algorithm, compared with patients who received usual care there was a decrease in bleeding that required intervention (47 [5%] patients vs 51 [6%] patients; RR 0·65, 0·42-0·99; p=0·046), organ failure (39 [5%] patients vs 92 [10%] patients; 0·35, 0·20-0·60; p=0·0001), and 90-day mortality (23 [3%] patients vs 44 [5%] patients; 0·42, 0·19-0·92; p=0·029).
interpretationThe algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of complications after pancreatic resection considerably improved clinical outcomes compared with usual care. This difference included an approximate 50% reduction in mortality at 90 days.
fundingThe Dutch Cancer Society and UMC Utrecht.
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.