SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2024
Effect of Pringle maneuver on prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases after liver resection: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePringle maneuver (PM) is a double-edged sword in liver resection, which is beneficial in reducing blood loss but also causes ischemia-reperfusion injury which may stimulate the outgrowth of micrometastases. The impact of PM on tumor recurrence remains controversial. This study aimed to assess whether PM has effect on the prognosis of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) after hepatectomy.
methodsPubMed and the Cochrane Library databases were searched. The PM is defined as the portal triad clamping for several minutes, followed by several minutes of reperfusion, repeated as needed. Prolonged PM was defined as continuous clamping ≥ 20 min or ≥ 3 cycles for maximally 15-min intermittent ischemia.
resultsEleven studies encompassing 4054 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) did not show significant differences between PM and non-PM groups for disease-free survival (DFS) (HR = 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.11, P = 0.36) and overall survival (HR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.76-1.39, P = 0.87). Subgroup analysis revealed that prolonged PM has adverse impact on DFS (HR 1.75, 95% CI = 1.28-2.40, P = 0.0005). However, non-prolonged PM is a protective factor for DFS (HR 0.82, 95% CI = 0.73-0.92, P = 0.001).
conclusionThese findings suggested that prolonged PM may have an adverse impact on the DFS of patients with CRLM and non-prolonged PM is a protective factor for DFS. Further prospective multicenter studies are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38316643What 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.