ArticleCureus2024
Microbiological Profiles of the Anatomical Sites of Perforation Peritonitis: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Linking clinical presentation and histopathological data in perforation peritonitis.Bioinformation · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction One of the most frequent emergencies that a general surgeon deals with is perforation peritonitis. The anatomical site of the perforation, which in turn affects the source of infection, has a major impact on the mortality rate due to perforation peritonitis. Early and suitable antibiotic therapy can be started in the postoperative period with the aid of knowledge about the microbiological profile and sensitivity of peritoneal fluid culture with respect to the anatomical sites of perforation peritonitis. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted from June 2021 to November 2021 where peritoneal fluid samples were collected intraoperatively from patients with perforation peritonitis. This was subjected to culture and sensitivity, and results were analyzed with respect to anatomical sites of perforation. Results Forty cases were investigated. The ileum (30%) was the most common site of perforation, followed by the stomach (22.5%), appendix (20%), duodenum (12.5%), caecum (5%), jejunum (5%), transverse colon (2.5%), and rectum (2.5%).
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.