ArticleBMC surgery2023
Analysis of risk factors for duodenal leak after repair of a duodenal perforation.
Article in BMC surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biliary Peritonitis Secondary to Proximal Duodenal Perforation in a Cat.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2026Article
- Predictive modelling of duodenal stump leakage after gastric cancer and long-term oncological outcomes.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Postoperative Findings Mimicking Duodenal Leak After Graham Patch Repair: Intact Repair With Retroperitoneal Abscess.Cureus · 2026Article
- Machine learning for prognostic assessment in elderly patients with gastroduodenal perforation.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison Between endoscopic submucosal dissection and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery for non-ampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective cohort study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Clinical evaluation of laparoscopic repair with quadruple therapy for acute gastric ulcer perforation in elderly patients.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Postoperative enteral nutrition timing and risk variation in elderly patients with perforated peptic ulcer.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Article
- Excisional biopsy of perforated gastric ulcer: mandatory or potentially harmful?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Observational
- Endoscopic Vacuum-Assisted Closure (E-VAC) in Septic Shock from Perforated Duodenal Ulcers with Abscess Formations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRepairing of a duodenal perforation is a well accepted procedure, but clinically, approximately 4% of patients develop duodenal leaks after perforation repair, increasing the risk of death. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from 168 patients at our hospital to explore risk factors for duodenal leak after perforation repair and developed a nomogram for predicting postoperative duodenal leak.
methodsThis retrospective case-control study totalled 168 patients undergoing repair of a duodenal perforation with omentopexy at the General Surgery Department, Dongnan Hospital of Xiamen University, from January 2012 to January 2022. The patients were divided into the non-leak group and the leak group. Risk factors were evaluated by analyzing the patient's sex, shock, diameter and anatomic position of the ulcer, use of NSAIDS and Glucocorticoid, history of drinking, diabetes, chronic diseases, age, time of onset of symptoms and lab tests.
resultOne hundred fifty-six patients (92.9%) who did not develop leaks after repair of a duodenal perforation were included in the non-leak group, and 12 (7.1%) developed leaks were included in the leak group. In univariate analysis, there were significant differences between the two groups referring to age, shock, NSAIDs, albumin, and perforation size (P < 0.05). The area under the ROC curve for perforation diameter was 0.737, the p-value was 0.006, the optimal cutoff point was 11.5, sensitivity was 58.3%, and specificity was 93.6%, the positive predictive value is 41.1%, and the negative predictive value is 98.0%. In the internal validation of the performance of the nomogram, the C-index and AUC of the model were 0.896(95%CI 0.81-0.98), demonstrating that the nomogram model was well calibrated.
conclusionThe study discussed the risk factors for postoperative duodenal leak in patients undergoing repair of a duodenal perforation, and a nomogram was constructed to predict the leak. Future prospective studies with large sample sizes and multiple centres are needed to further elucidate the risk of duodenal leak after repair of a duodenal perforation.
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.