ArticleMedical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina)2024
Impact of Different Surgical Approaches on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Head Carcinoma.
Article in Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina), 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Radical surgical resection for pancreatic head carcinoma offers a chance for cure but unfortunately is only available to a limited number of patients. For a significant number of patients, palliative surgery remains the only option. The question of the most effective approach for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic head carcinoma (BRPHC) remains unresolved. Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the morbidity and mortality following R1 duodenocephalic pancreatectomy and double palliative bypass to explore the most optimal surgical treatment for patients with BRPHC. Methods: Our retrospective cohort study included 64 patients with BRPHC who underwent surgery from 2012 to 2019, with postoperative follow-up for three years. Morbidity and mortality parameters were examined based on the type of surgical treatment: R1 duodenocephalic pancreatectomy or palliative double bypass. Chi-square test, univariate regression, and Kaplan-Meier analysis were used as basic statistical methods in the analysis of the results. Results: Patients undergoing R1 duodenocephalic pancreatectomy had a 3.69 times higher risk of developing biliary leak (p=0.039; 95%CI:1.066, 1.181) and shorter survival compared to those undergoing palliative double bypass (p=0.022). No statistically significant association was found between the type of surgical procedure and other postoperative complications. Conclusion: Our study suggests that the double palliative bypass procedure may be a better option than R1 resection for patients with BRPHC.
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.