Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35832848›Full record

SynthesisBioMed research international2022

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Complications after Laparoscopic Surgery and Open Surgery in the Treatment of Pelvic Abscess.

Xiaolu Chen, Jun Su, Lina Xu, Huiping Zhang

RetractedOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiaolu ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taizhou First People's Hospital, Taizhou, Zhejiang 318020, China.
Jun SuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taizhou First People's Hospital, Taizhou, Zhejiang 318020, China.
Lina XuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taizhou First People's Hospital, Taizhou, Zhejiang 318020, China.
Huiping ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taizhou First People's Hospital, Taizhou, Zhejiang 318020, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6045-9396
Taizhou First People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pelvic abscess surgery consists mostly of open laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery. Open surgery is regarded as a classic procedure. With the rise and promotion of laparoscopic indications in recent years, comparative studies of the two's postoperative effectiveness have been limited. Objective: To compare the clinical effects of laparoscopic exploratory surgery and open surgery in the treatment of pelvic abscess. Methods: Through computer searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and Weipu databases, we found publicly available case-control research on laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for treating pelvic abscess. The papers that met the evaluation criteria were screened, and meta-analysis was used to look at 8 papers on laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for treating pelvic abscess from 2010 to 2021. Results: The results of this study showed that compared with the open laparotomy group, the incidence of laparoscopic group in the incision infection rate (RR = 0.29, 95% CI (0.20, 0.41), and Conclusion: In terms of incision infection, intestinal damage, intestinal obstruction, and recurrence of pelvic abscess, the laparoscopic group clearly outperforms the open group, and it merits clinical promotion and use.

Indexed as

Intestinal ObstructionLaparoscopyAbscessColectomyHumansLaparotomyPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35832848
PMCPMC9273437
OpenAlexW4283804134

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.