Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36003001›Full record

ArticleAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2022

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage and percutaneous catheter drainage of postoperative fluid collection after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Da Hee Woo, Jae Hoon Lee, Ye Jong Park, Woo Hyung Lee, Ki Byung Song, Dae Wook Hwang, Song Cheol Kim

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Da Hee WooDepartment of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4768-7308
Jae Hoon LeeDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6170-8729
Ye Jong ParkDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8532-9531
Woo Hyung LeeDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8119-6943
Ki Byung SongDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5422-5481
Dae Wook HwangDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1749-038X
Song Cheol KimDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4552-4169
Ulsan College · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Backgrounds/Aims: Postoperative fluid collection is a common complication of pancreatic resection without clear management guidelines. This study aimed to compare outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided trans-gastric drainage and percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in patients who experienced this adverse event after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Methods: Demographic and clinical data and intervention outcomes of 53 patients who underwent drainage procedure (EUS-guided, n = 32; PCD, n = 21) for fluid collection after PD between January 2015 and June 2019 in our tertiary referral center were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Prior to drainage, 83.0% had leukocytosis and 92.5% presented with one or more of the following signs or symptoms: fever (69.8%), abdominal pain (69.8%), and nausea/vomiting (17.0%). Within 8 weeks of drainage, 77.4% showed a diameter decrease of more than 50% (87.5% in EUS vs. 66.7% in PCD, Conclusions: EUS-guided drainage and PCD are both safe and effective methods for managing fluid collection after PD. However, EUS-guided drainage can shorten hospital stay and duration of intravenous antibiotics use.

Indexed as

DrainageEndoscopic ultrasonographyPancreasPancreaticoduodenectomyTransgastric drainage

Identifiers

PMID36003001
PMCPMC9721245
OpenAlexW4293104512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.