ArticleCureus2025
Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Pediatric Blunt Pancreatic Injury: A Case Series.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Pancreatic stent and transpapillary pseudocyst drainage via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for children with blunt pancreatic duct injury.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pancreatic injuries in pediatric patients are rare and present challenges in diagnosis and treatment due to patient size and limited evidence-based guidelines. This case series highlights the laparoscopic management, decision-making process, and outcomes of three pediatric patients with grade III pancreatic injuries. Case 1 involved a two-year-old male with a near-complete transection of the pancreatic tail following a motor vehicle collision. He underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy 24 hours post-injury, complicated by ileus and mild pancreatitis, which resolved without intervention. Case 2 was another two-year-old male with a complete pancreatic transection from blunt trauma, who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy 36 hours post-injury and was discharged uneventfully. Case 3 was a 12-year-old male with a mid-body pancreatic transection after a handlebar accident, who underwent delayed laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy seven days post-injury following failed pancreatic duct stenting. Postoperatively, he developed pancreatic leakage and bowel perforation, requiring additional surgeries, including a colostomy and further pancreatic resection. Laparoscopy was selected in all cases due to hemodynamic stability and enhanced visualization of the pancreatic duct and splenic vessels. In Cases 1 and 2, small patient size precluded endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, prompting early surgical intervention. In Case 3, delayed surgery after failed stenting led to inflammation and significant postoperative complications. This series emphasizes the importance of timely surgical decision-making in pediatric pancreatic injuries. While laparoscopy offers advantages, challenges such as pancreatic duct identification and the risk of conversion to open surgery require careful intraoperative assessment.
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.