ArticleCureus2025
Postoperative Pelvic Abscess Risk in Gynecologic Surgery: A Four-Year Single Institution Experience.
Article in Cureus, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Hemostatic agents (HAs) are often used in gynecologic surgery to control bleeding when conventional methods such as sutures, clips, and electrocautery are insufficient. Tisseel Fibrin Sealant (FS) and oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) (e.g., Surgicel Powder) are two HAs that are commonly utilized; however, there is limited clinical data regarding their safety profiles, specifically regarding the risk of postoperative complications such as pelvic abscess. This study was initiated following observations of increased readmissions for pelvic abscesses in patients receiving ORC. Objective The primary objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the association between the intraoperative use of FS versus ORC and the incidence of postoperative pelvic abscess and other associated complications in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on women who underwent gynecologic surgery by the author at a single academic institution in Baltimore, Maryland, between 2019 and 2023. Patient and surgical characteristics were extracted, and comparisons were made between those who received FS versus ORC. The association between intraoperative HA use and postoperative pelvic abscess formation was examined. Secondary outcomes included the assessment of other major postoperative complications. Results A total of 607 patients were identified, with 422 receiving ORC and 185 receiving FS; 72 (11.9%) patients experienced postoperative complications. Pelvic abscess occurred in 10.4% (95% CI, 7.5%-13.3%) of ORC-treated patients compared with 0% (95% CI, 0%-1.6%) of FS-treated patients (p < 0.05). The overall complication rate was significantly greater at 15.6% (95% CI, 12.2-19.0%) for ORC versus 3.2% (95% CI 0.7%-5.8%) for FS. Readmission within 30 days of surgery occurred in 12.1% (95% CI, 9.0%-15.2%) of ORC-treated patients compared with 0.5% (95% CI, 0%-1.6%) of FS-treated patients, a significantly higher rate among those receiving ORC. Conclusion The use of ORC for adjunctive hemostasis in gynecologic surgery between 2019 and 2023 was associated with a significantly higher risk of pelvic abscess and other postoperative complications compared to FS. These findings suggest that FS may be a safer alternative for managing bleeding in gynecologic procedures, particularly in patients at higher risk for postoperative infections. Enhanced regimens of antibiotic prophylaxis are clinically significant and should be considered when ORC is used. These findings warrant prospective studies to validate these results and optimize clinical practice.
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.