ArticleCureus2024
Surgical Outcomes of Open and Laparoscopic Hartmann Reversal: A Single-Center Comparative 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesHartmann reversal (HR) is challenging and traditionally requires a large laparotomy wound. With the development of minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's operation (HO) was attempted. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic Hartmann reversal (LHR) versus open Hartmann reversal (OHR). MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this study, we included 33 patients who underwent HR at Chi Mei Medical Center between January 2015 and March 2023. Ten patients received LHR, while 23 received OHR. We compared patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, early postoperative complications, and late postoperative complications between the two groups.
resultsThere was no significant difference in the baseline demographics of both groups. Compared to the open method, the LHR group had a shorter hospital stay and time to solid diet. The median length of hospital stay in the OHR and LHR groups was 15.00 (Q1-Q3: 13.00-16.00) and 11.5 (Q1-Q3: 10.00-14.00) days (p = 0.028), respectively. The median time to solid diet was 8.00 (Q1-Q3: 7.00-8.00) days in the OHR group and 5.00 (Q1-Q3: 5.00-7.00) days in the LHR group (p = 0.022). No statistical significance between the groups was noticed in early and late postoperative complications.
conclusionsWhether using a laparoscopic or an open method, HR is challenging. In our study, patients who underwent LHR were associated with reduced hospital stays and faster bowel movements.
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.