ReviewWorld journal of pediatric surgery2024
Surgical management of the diaphragmatic defect in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a contemporary review.
Review in World journal of pediatric surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perioperative monitoring in oesophageal atresia and congenital diaphragmatic hernia patients - exploring the impact of diagnosis on neurocardiovascular coupling.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- Article
- Validation and in silico function prediction of circtial1 as a novel marker of abnormal lung development in nitrofen-induced congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH).Pediatric surgery international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Worldwide, 150 children are born each day with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH), a diaphragmatic defect with concomitant abnormal lung development. Patients with CDH with large defects are particularly challenging to treat, have the highest mortality, and are at significant risk of long-term complications. Advances in prenatal and neonatal treatments have improved survival in high-risk patients with CDH, but surgical treatment of large defects lacks standardization. Open repair by an abdominal approach has long been considered the traditional procedure, but the type of defect repair (patch or muscle flap) and patch material (non-absorbable, synthetic or absorbable, biological) remain subjects of debate. Increased experience and improved techniques in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) have expanded selection criteria for thoracoscopic defect repair in cardiopulmonary stable patients with small defects. However, the application of MIS to repair large defects remains controversial due to increased recurrence rates and unknown long-term effects of perioperative hypercapnia and acidosis resulting from capnothorax and reduced ventilation. Current recommendations on the surgical management rely on cohort studies of varying patient numbers and data on the long-term outcomes are sparse. Here, we discuss surgical approaches for diaphragmatic defect repair highlighting advancements, and knowledge gaps in surgical techniques (open surgery and MIS), patch materials and muscle flaps for large defects, as well as procedural adjuncts and management of CDH variants.
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.