Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38571455›Full record

SynthesisInternational wound journal2024

Comparing surgical site wound infection after laparoscopic and open radical cystectomies in patients with bladder cancer.

Hua-Ming Luo, Yong-Jiang Xiong

RetractedOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 It has been retracted, and should not be counted.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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hua-Ming LuoDepartment of Urology, Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Yong-Jiang XiongDepartment of Urology, Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Chongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study comprehensively compared the effects of laparoscopic and open radical cystectomies on postoperative wound infections and complications in patients with bladder cancer. We conducted a systematic search for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases, from database inception to October 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 software. Overall, 16 studies involving 1427 patients with bladder cancer were included. The analysis revealed that, compared with open radical cystectomy, laparoscopic radical cystectomy significantly reduced the incidence of wound infections (odds ratio [OR] = 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.64, p < 0.001) and complications (OR = 0.35, 95%CI: 0.26-0.47, p < 0.001) and significantly shortened the hospital stay duration (standardised mean difference [SMD] = -1.85, 95%CI: -2.34 to -1.36, p < 0.001). Thus, this study determined that laparoscopic radical cystectomy for the treatment of bladder cancer effectively reduced the occurrence of wound infections and complications, and significantly shortened the patient's hospital stay, demonstrating notable therapeutic effectiveness worthy of clinical application.

Indexed as

CystectomyLaparoscopySurgical Wound InfectionUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle Agedbladder cancercomplicationslaparoscopic radical cystectomywound infections

Identifiers

PMID38571455
PMCPMC10993015
OpenAlexW4393948025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.