ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Comprehensive assessment of risk factors and pathogenic characteristics of wound infections following thoracoscopic radical resection for lung cancer.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- RETRACTION: Comprehensive Assessment of Risk Factors and Pathogenic Characteristics of Wound Infections Following Thoracoscopic Radical Resection for Lung Cancer.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Comprehensive assessment of risk factors and pathogenic characteristics of wound infections following thoracoscopic radical resection for lung cancer.International wound journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2025-03-21Compromised Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, with surgical resection as a primary treatment modality. However, postoperative wound infections (PWIs) pose significant risks following thoracoscopic radical resection. This study aims to identify the risk factors and pathogenetic characteristics associated with PWIs in lung cancer surgery. A comprehensive retrospective study was conducted from August 2021 to June 2023 at our institution. The study included 30 patients who developed PWIs and 60 controls who did not, following thoracoscopic radical resection for lung cancer. We evaluated various factors including age, hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, body mass index (BMI), operation time, prophylactic antibiotic use, diabetes mellitus and tumour staging. Diagnostic criteria for PWIs were based on clinical signs and microbiological confirmation. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software, utilizing chi-square tests, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The predominant pathogens identified in PWIs were Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Univariate analysis revealed operation time (≥4 h) and diabetes mellitus as significant risk factors for PWIs, while prophylactic antibiotic use was associated with a lower incidence of PWIs. Multivariate analysis further confirmed these findings, highlighting prolonged operation time and diabetes as significant predictors of PWIs, and antibiotic use as a protective factor. Prolonged operation time and diabetes mellitus significantly increase the risk of PWIs following thoracoscopic radical resection for lung cancer, whereas prophylactic antibiotics play a protective role. These findings underscore the importance of tailored preventive strategies in clinical practice to minimize the occurrence of postoperative infections and improve surgical outcomes in lung cancer patients.
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.