ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2025
Shock index and early warning score in liver cancer rupture shock.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary liver cancer is a globally prevalent malignancy, with China accounting for approximately 55% of new cases, and is linked to hepatitis B, aflatoxin, and cirrhosis. Its rupture with hemorrhagic shock is a lethal complication with high mortality, and traditional triage struggles with timely risk stratification, necessitating better tools, such as the integrated shock index (SI)-early warning score (EWS).
aimTo study and analyze the combined effect of the SI and EWS in primary liver cancer patients with ruptured hemorrhage and shock.
methodsIn total, 118 patients who visited the Emergency Department of Nantong Third People's Hospital from January 2023 to December 2024 were selected and randomly divided into a control group (59 patients who received routine emergency treatment) and an observation group (59 patients who received condition assessment and intervention by combining the SI and EWS based on routine emergency treatment). The clinical treatment outcomes, respiratory function indicators, serological indicators, complications, and satisfaction with emergency intervention before and after the emergency intervention were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe emergency, triage, waiting, and hemostasis times, as well as hospital stay were shorter in the observation group than in the control group (
conclusionThe combined application of the SI and EWS in patients with primary liver cancer rupture, hemorrhage, and shock can significantly shorten emergency treatment time, improve respiratory function and serological indicators, reduce the incidence of complications, and enhance patient satisfaction with emergency interventions, with higher clinical treatment efficiency and quality. Therefore, it is worthy of promotion and application.
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.