Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39678410›Full record

ArticleGland surgery2024

External versus internal pancreatic duct drainage for early efficacy after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in the early stages of the low-flow center learning curve: a retrospective comparative study.

Shicheng Gong, Shijia Li, Yuhang Liang, Xiao Zuo, Chenglong Huo, Nuo Cheng, Shuai Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gland surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Shicheng GongDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Shijia LiDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Yuhang LiangDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Xiao ZuoDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Chenglong HuoDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Nuo ChengDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Shuai WangDepartment of Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is no uniform conclusion as to whether internal or external drainage of the supporting duct is more clinically effective, especially in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) which has not yet been reported in clinical studies. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of external versus internal pancreatic duct drainage during LPD performed in a low-flow center at the beginning of the learning curve. Methods: The clinical data of a total of 73 cases of patients who underwent LPD between January 2022 and June 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Forty-eight cases performed by doctors from Jingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University were considered as not having passed the early stages of the learning curve, and 25 cases performed by the invited team with rich LPD experience were considered as having passed the early stages of the learning curve. According to whether they had passed the early stages of the learning curve or not and the method of pancreatic duct drainage used, 73 patients were divided into the external drainage group (EDG) that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (n=24), the internal drainage group (IDG) that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (n=24), and the IDG that passed the early stages of the learning curve (n=25). The EDG was compared with the two IDGs in terms of complication rates and other procedure-related indicators. Results: The total pancreatic fistulae incidence rate of the whole group was 16.4% (12/73), and the incidence of pancreatic fistulae was significantly lower in the EDG that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (8.3%) than in the IDG that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (33.3%), with statistically significant difference (P=0.03); the incidence of pancreatic fistulae was slightly higher in the EDG that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (8.3%) than in the IDG that passed the early stages of the learning curve (8.0%), with statistically not significant difference (P>0.99). The incidence of biliary fistulae in the EDG that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (0.0%) was lower than that in the IDG that did not pass the early stages of the learning curve (25.0%), and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.02). The differences in other complications between the EDG and the two IDGs were not statistically significant. Conclusions: External pancreatic duct drainage is more helpful in reducing the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulae, more conducive to the safe passage of the operator through the initial stages of the LPD learning curve, more suitable for use in the development of LPD in low-volume centers.

Indexed as

laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD)Learning curvelow-flow centerpancreatic ductal drainagepancreatic fistulae

Identifiers

PMID39678410
PMCPMC11635580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.