ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2023
Comparison of 'primary repair' and 'placing a drain without repair' methods in duodenum perforations.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal Evaluation of the Anti-Adhesion Effects of Heparin-Loaded PLGA/HA Nanofiber Membranes in an Intraperitoneal Adhesion Model in Rats.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuodenal ulcer perforation is a serious condition. A number of methods have been defined and used in surgical treatment. In this study, it was aimed to compare the effectiveness of 'primary repair' and 'drain placement without repair' methods in duodenal perforations using an animal model.
methodsThree equivalent groups of ten rats each were formed. Perforation was created in the duodenum in the first (primary repair/sutured group) and the second group (drain placement without repair/sutureless drainage group). In the first group, the per-foration was repaired with sutures. In the second group, only a drain was placed in the abdomen without sutures. In the third group (control group), only laparotomy was performed. Neutrophil count, sedimentation, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), serum total an-tioxidant capacity (TAC), serum total thiol, serum native thiol, and serum myeloperoxidase (MPO) analyses were performed on animal subjects in the pre-operative period and on the post-operative 1st and 7th days. Histological and immunohistochemical (transforming growth factor-beta 1 [TGF-β1]) analyzes were performed. Blood analysis, histological, and immunohistochemical findings obtained from the groups were compared statistically.
resultsThere was no significant difference between the first and second groups, except for the TAC on the post-operative 7th day and MPO values on the post-operative 1st day (P>0.05). Although tissue healing was more pronounced in the second group than in the first group, there was no significant difference between the groups (P>0.05). TGF-β1 immunoreactivity observed in the second group was found to be significantly higher than in the first group (P<0.05).
conclusionWe think that the sutureless drainage method is as effective as the primary repair method in the treatment of duo-denal ulcer perforation and can be safely applied as an alternative to the primary repair method. However, further studies are needed to fully determine the efficacy of the sutureless drainage method.
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.