ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Efficacy of the 'Five-Needle' method for pancreatojejunostomy in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: an observational study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The five-needle pancreato-intestinal anastomosis method is used in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). The aim of this study was to explore the clinical efficacy and adverse reactions of this new surgical method and to provide a scientific reference for promoting this new surgical method in the future. Methods: A single-centre observational study was conducted to evaluate the safety and practicality of the five-needle method for pancreatojejunostomy in LPD surgeries. The clinical data of 78 patients who were diagnosed with periampullary malignancies and underwent LPD were collected from the 1 Results: The incidence of pancreatic fistula in the five-needle method group and the duct-to-mucosa method group was not significantly different (25.6% vs. 28.6%, p=0.767). Additionally, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss (Z=-1.330, p=0.183), postoperative haemorrhage rates (p=0.998), length of postoperative hospital stay (Z=-0.714, p=0.475), bile leakage rate (p=0.745), or perioperative mortality rate (p=0.999). However, the operative time in the 'Five-Needle' method group was significantly shorter than that in the 'Duct-to-Mucosa' method group (270 ± 170 mins vs. 300 ± 210 mins, Z=-2.336, p=0.019). Further analysis revealed that in patients with pancreatic ducts smaller than 3 mm, the incidence of pancreatic fistula was lower for the 'Five-Needle' method than for the 'Duct-to-Mucosa' method (12.5% vs. 53.8%, p=0.007). Conclusion: The five-needle method is safe and efficient for pancreatojejunostomy in LPD, and is particularly suitable for anastomosis in nondilated pancreatic ducts. It is a promising, valuable, and recommendable surgical method worthy of wider adoption.
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.