ArticlePloS one2025
Feasibility study of a novel technique for treating refractory ascites using a peritoneobladder shunt in a swine model.
Article in PloS one, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ascites is often treated through paracentesis, which requires repeated application and poses risks. In this study, we developed a peritoneobladder shunt that allows natural ascites drainage from the peritoneal cavity to the bladder. We conducted an experiment to determine the functional effect of the peritoneobladder shunt in a swine model. Peritoneobladder shunts were developed and placed in 4 swine models to test their effectiveness in draining ascitic fluid from the peritoneal cavity to the bladder. The peritoneobladder shunts were inserted laparoscopically; some models received the shunts with one-way check valves to prevent fluid reflux, while one received peritoneobladder shunts without the valves. After a short (7 days) survival period, experiments were conducted to verify that the peritoneobladder shunts were properly fixed in the bladder. During the survival period, two peritoneobladder shunts could be placed in the bladder wall without rupture or tearing. When the peritoneal cavity was filled with an ascitic fluid substitute, the fluid naturally drained into the bladder; when the peritoneobladder shunts with one-way check valves were used, no reflux occurred from the bladder into the peritoneal cavity. In experiments using swine models, the peritoneobladder shunts effectively drained fluid, and one-way check valves successfully prevented reflux. These findings suggest that the peritoneobladder shunt could be an alternative option to alleviate the burden on patients who require paracentesis, allowing home-based treatment. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term stability and safety of this procedure in humans.
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.