Observational studyEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Retrospective bi-centric observational study comparing primary anastomosis or suturing vs enterostomy for spontaneous intestinal perforations in extremely preterm infants.
Observational study in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare two initial surgical strategies for spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) in a bi-centric cohort of extremely preterm and/or extremely low birthweight infants. Observational, retrospective study including infants born before 28 weeks of gestation and/or with birthweight < 1000 g, born between 2010 and 2020, operated for SIP in two type 3 centers. Infants were attributed to groups according to the surgical technique of the first intervention: primary anastomosis or suturing (PAS) or enterostomy (ES). The primary endpoint was the duration of parenteral nutrition (PN) analyzed using multivariate Cox model. Secondary endpoints included total number of surgeries under general anesthesia, morbidity and mortality at discharge, and outcomes at 2 years. Among 65 included patients, those in the PAS group (n = 46) had a higher median [IQR] CRIB II score than those from the ES group (n = 19) (11.5 [10-13] vs 8 [4-10], p = 0.01) and were more frequently operated in Robert Debré (78% vs 21%, p < 0.001) but had comparable other clinical characteristics at birth and at the time of surgery. As compared to the ES group, infants from the PAS group had a significantly higher probability of NP weaning after adjustment (adjusted hazard ratio 3.05, 95% CI [1.43-6.49]) and a significantly lower median [IQR] number of general anesthesia (1 [1-1] vs 2 [2-2], p < 0.001). At discharge and at age 2, there was no significant difference in outcomes between groups. Conclusion: Initial one-stage surgery for SIP in extremely preterm infants was associated with shorter NP duration and fewer general anesthesia in this study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40019632What 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.