Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35915535›Full record

ReviewJournal of minimal access surgery

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage to abdominal abscess: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sifan Liu, Zibin Tian, Yueping Jiang, Tao Mao, Xueli Ding, Xue Jing

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sifan LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, China.
Zibin TianDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, China.
Yueping JiangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, China.
Tao MaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, China.
Xueli DingDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, China.
Xue JingDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, China.
Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University · CNQingdao University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Ultrasound (US)- or computed tomography-guided drainage for abdominal abscess is currently the first-line options for drainage, but both options have disadvantages. Patients without adequate windows for drainage mostly undergo surgical drainage. However, surgical drainage is invasive and expensive. Endoscopic US (EUS)-guided drainage is a minimally invasive alternative for abdominal abscess, but there is less consensus on its efficacy, safety and complications. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate EUS-guided drainage for abdominal abscess. Materials and Methods: We retrieved relevant papers on EUS-guided drainage for abdominal abscess from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE databases. Each paper was reviewed, and data were extracted. We used R software version 3.6.3 to perform the meta-analysis. Fixed effects models were used for merging data. Results: A total of 11 papers met the inclusion criteria, with a total sample population of 264 patients. The meta-analysis showed that the pooled clinical success rate was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.95), the technical success rate was 99% (95% CI, 0.97-1.00) and the recurrence rate was 1% (95% CI, 0.00-0.03). Three studies reported the complications, including perforation, bleeding and stent migration; none of the other eight studies reported complications. There were no significant differences between subgroups. There was no publication bias in either the clinical or the technical success rates. Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that EUS-guided drainage for abdominal abscess was effective and safe, with an excellent technical success rate. In addition, EUS-guided drainage could be used for abscesses with complex anatomy. Nevertheless, complications and stent type should be considered.

Indexed as

Abdominal abscessdrainageendoscopic ultrasoundmeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID35915535
PMCPMC9632695
OpenAlexW4285612760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.