Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37609368›Full record

ArticleSurgery open science2023

Evaluating the role of the Minimal Incision Retroperitoneal Necrosectomy (MIRN) in the management of infected pancreatic necrosis: Experience from a tertiary care center.

Mohanasundaram Avudiappan, Venu Bhargava, Aditya Kulkarni, Mandeep Kang, Surinder Singh Rana, Rajesh Gupta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Infected pancreatic necrosis-Current trends in management.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohanasundaram AvudiappanDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012, India.
Venu BhargavaDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012, India.
Aditya KulkarniDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012, India.
Mandeep KangDepartment of Radio Diagnosis and Imaging, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012, India.
Surinder Singh RanaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012,India.
Rajesh GuptaDepartment of Surgical Gastroenterology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh 160012, India.
Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The conventional open necrosectomy was associated with high mortality and morbidities like secondary organ failure, incisional hernia, enterocutaneous fistula, and external pancreatic fistula. In acute pancreatitis, collections are primarily confined to the retroperitoneal space. Hence, the retroperitoneal approach can be used to drain the collection and necrotic material. It benefits smaller incisions and better outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality than the conventional open necrosectomy. This study primarily aims to describe the effects of minimal incision retroperitoneal necrosectomy versus conventional open necrosectomy for treating INP. Moreover, it provides evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of this method. Methods: A single-center retrospective study of the prospectively maintained database from April 2008 to December 2021. Results: A total of 122 patients were included in the study. Seventy-eight patients had an open necrosectomy, 30 had a MIRN, and 14 had a VARD procedure. These three groups were comparable in demographic variables. Preoperative variables like APACHE II at presentation, Modified CTSI, percentage of necrosis, multi-organ failure, time to surgery, and need for preoperative ICU stay were comparable among the three groups. Postoperative mortality was low in the MIRN group{open 35.8 % vs. MIRN 20.5 % vs. VARD 35.7 %, Conclusion: MIRN is a simple and easy-to-adapt procedure for infected pancreatic necrosis in the appropriately selected patient group.

Indexed as

Acute pancreatitisInfected pancreatic necrosisMinimal incision retroperitoneal necrosectomyOpen necrosectomyVideo-assisted retroperitoneal debridement

Identifiers

PMID37609368
PMCPMC10440548
OpenAlexW4384831242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.