SynthesisJournal of cardiac surgery2022
Mortality after sternal reconstruction with pectoralis major flap vs omental flap for postsurgical mediastinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiac surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immediate flap increases patient safety for deep sternal wound infection: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- Sternal Wound Reconstruction Following Deep Sternal Wound Infection: Past, Present and Future: A Literature Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
- Successful omental flap coverage repair of a rectovaginal fistula after low anterior resection: a case report.Surgical case reports · 2023Article
- A unique anatomical variation of the vascular supply of the ovary, uterine tube, and uterus from the greater omentum - an anatomical case study.Physiological research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDeep sternal wound infections are rare but severe complications after median sternotomy and can be managed with sternal reconstruction. The use of pectoralis major flap (PMF) has traditionally been the first-line approach for flap reconstruction but the advantage in patients' survival when compared to the omental flap (OF) transposition is still not clear. We performed a study-level meta-analysis evaluating the association of the type of flap on postoperative outcomes.
methodsA systematic search of the literature was performed to identify all studies comparing the postoperative outcomes of PMF versus OF for sternal reconstruction. The primary outcome was postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were the occurrence of sepsis, pneumonia, operative time, and length of stay. Binary outcomes were pooled using an inverse variance method and reported as odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous outcomes were pooled using an inverse variance method and reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% CI.
resultsFour studies with a total of 528 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, 443 patients had PMF reconstruction, and 85 patients had OF reconstruction. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between PMF patients and OF patients in mortality (OR 0.6 [0.16; 2.17]; p = .09), sepsis (OR 1.1 [0.49; 2.47]; p = .43), pneumonia (OR 0.72 [0.18; 2.8]; p = .11), length of stay (SMD -0.59 [-2.03; 0.85]; p < .01), and operative time (SMD 0.08 [-1.21; 1.57]; p < .01).
conclusionOur analysis found no association between the type of flap and postoperative mortality, the incidence of pneumonia, sepsis, operation time, and length of stay.
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.