ArticleContemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland)2022
Outcome after implementation of a clinical pathway for pancreaticoduodenectomy in a low volume centre.
Article in Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To study whether the implementation of a clinical pathway including some enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) items for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in a low volume centre for pancreatic surgery was safe. Material and methods: Patients undergoing elective PD within a clinical pathway between 1 October 2013 and 30 September 2019 were considered for the study and the outcome was compared between the first and second period of the study. The primary endpoint was the achievement of postoperative key targets of the protocol. Secondary endpoints were complications, mortality and readmissions within 90 days postoperatively, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: Forty-five patients could be ana-lysed. The two groups were balanc-ed for demographic, clinical and histological variables. In the second period more patients achieved key targets: nasogastric tube removal at postoperative day (PoD) 2, oral fluidsat PoD 3, drain removal at PoD 5 and hospital discharge at PoD 9. The rates of postoperative complications, mor-tality and readmissions were not significantly different between the two groups and were similar to data reported for high volume centres. Conclusions: Our results show that the implementation of a clinical pathway following PD and including some ERAS items was feasible and safe in a low volume centre for pancreatic surgery.
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.