ArticleBMC surgery2025
Effect of abdominal drain on surgical site infection undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in adults: a propensity score matching analysis.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the effect of abdominal drain on the incidence of surgical site infection undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for perforated appendicitis in adults.
methodsClinical data of adult patients who were intraoperatively diagnosed with perforated appendicitis and underwent laparoscopic appendectomy at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between January 2019 and December 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. According to whether an abdominal drain was placed during surgery, the patients were categorized into an abdominal drain group and a non-abdominal drain group. A total of 128 patients were included, comprising 73 cases in the abdominal drain group and 55 cases in the non-abdominal drain group. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were collected. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to balance intergroup differences in clinical features.
resultsAfter PSM, the baseline characteristics between the two groups showed no significant differences and were well-balanced (P > 0.05). The abdominal drain group exhibited significantly longer operative time (P = 0.010), duration of postoperative antibiotic use (P < 0.001), and length of stay (P < 0.001). Before matching, the overall surgical site infection (SSI) rates were 27% in the abdominal drain group and 23% in the non-abdominal drain group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.61). After matching, the overall SSI rate was 24% in both groups, and the difference remained statistically non-significant (P > 0.99).
conclusionOur findings do not support routine abdominal drain placement in adults with perforated appendicitis undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy and align with current guideline trends. However, prospective multicenter randomized controlled trials are warranted.
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.