ArticlePatient safety in surgery2025
Lessons learned from a decade of re-exploratory laparotomies in obstetrics and gynecology at a tertiary care hospital in Mumbai, India, 2014-2024.
Article in Patient safety in 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRe-exploratory laparotomy in obstetrics and gynecology is a serious and challenging surgical event associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Understanding its incidence, indications, and outcomes is crucial for improving patient care and surgical safety. This study presents a comprehensive analysis of re-exploratory laparotomies over a 10-year period in a major tertiary care center.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted on all patients who underwent re-exploratory laparotomy following obstetric or gynecological surgery between 2014 and 2024. Data on patient demographics, primary surgery, indications for re-exploration, time to re-intervention, procedures performed, and postoperative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and t-tests to identify significant associations.
resultsA total of 117 cases of re-exploratory laparotomy were identified. The mean age of patients was 31.8 ± 7.0 years. The most common primary surgeries were Cesarean Sect. (46.2%) and total abdominal hysterectomy (23.1%). The leading indications for re-exploration were postpartum hemorrhage (26.5%), muscle hematoma (20.5%), and burst abdomen (17.1%). The mean time to re-exploration was 4.7 ± 2.7 days. The overall mortality rate was 8.5%, and the postoperative complication rate was 46.2%. No significant association was found between the level of emergency and patient outcome (p = 0.637).
conclusionRe-exploratory laparotomy remains a critical event in obstetric and gynecological practice, with hemorrhage and postoperative wound complications being the primary drivers. This study highlights the need for meticulous surgical technique, early recognition of complications, and prompt intervention to improve patient outcomes. Further research is needed to identify high-risk patient groups and optimize management strategies.
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.