ArticleComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Magnetic Resonance Imaging under Image Enhancement Algorithm to Analyze the Clinical Value of Placement of Drainage Tube on Incision Healing after Hepatobiliary Surgery.
Article in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk prediction of poor wound healing in patients with thoracoscopic lung cancer resection with drainage tube.American journal of cancer research · 2023Article
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
This study was aimed at exploring the application value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based on image enhancement algorithm in analyzing the placement of drainage tubes in the healing of incisions after hepatobiliary surgery. A total of 70 patients with liver cancer undergoing laparoscopic hepatobiliary surgery were selected, including 34 males and 36 females. According to the detection method of postoperative recovery, they were divided into a group A (conventional MRI detection) and a group B (MRI detection based on Retinex algorithm). Patients were divided into two groups according to whether subcutaneous drainage tubes were placed: group C (no subcutaneous drainage tubes were placed) and group D (subcutaneous drainage tubes were placed), with 35 patients in each group. The results showed that there was no significant difference between group A and group B in tumor residual or recurrence. The detection rate of tumor capsule in group B was significantly higher than that in group A (
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.