Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38321485›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2024

Safety and efficacy of stoma site selection in CT-guided percutaneous gastrostomy: a retrospective analysis.

Hu Chang-Ming, Qi Xiao-Mei, Liu Li, Liang Qing-Hua, Xiong Jun-Ru, Li Liang-Shan, Deng Liang-Yu, Huang Xue-Quan, He Chuang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hu Chang-Ming *Department of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Qi Xiao-Mei *Department of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Liu LiDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Liang Qing-HuaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Xiong Jun-RuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Li Liang-ShanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Deng Liang-YuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
Huang Xue-QuanDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China.
He ChuangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine (Treatment Center of Minimally Invasive Interventional), First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, No. 30 of Gao Tanyan District, Chongqing, China. longtoo123@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the safety and efficacy of CPG in the rectus abdominis and intercostal regions. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study included 226 patients who underwent CPG at a single center, with the stoma placed in the rectus abdominis or intercostal region. Surgical outcomes and complications, such as pain and infection within 6 months postoperatively, were recorded.

resultsThe surgical success rate was 100%, and the all-cause mortality rate within 1 month was 0%. An intercostal stoma was placed in 56 patients; a rectus abdominis stoma was placed in 170 patients. The duration of surgery was longer for intercostal stoma placement (37.66 ± 14.63 min) than for rectus abdominis stoma placement (30.26 ± 12.40 min) (P = 0.000). At 1 month postsurgery, the rate of stoma infection was greater in the intercostal group (32.1%) than in the rectus abdominis group (20.6%), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.077). No significant difference was observed in the infection rate between the two groups at 3 or 6 months postsurgery (P > 0.05). Intercostal stoma patients reported higher pain scores during the perioperative period and at 1 month postsurgery (P = 0.000), but pain scores were similar between the two groups at 3 and 6 months postsurgery. The perioperative complication rates for intercostal and rectus abdominis surgery were 1.8% and 5.3%, respectively (P = 0.464), with no significant difference in the incidence of tube dislodgement (P = 0.514). Patient weight improved significantly at 3 and 6 months postoperatively compared to preoperatively (P < 0.05).

conclusionRectus abdominis and intercostal stomas have similar safety and efficacy. However, intercostal stomas may result in greater short-term patient discomfort.

Indexed as

GastrostomySurgical StomasHumansPainRectus AbdominisRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedCT-guidedGastrostomyIntercostalRectus abdominis

Identifiers

PMID38321485
PMCPMC10845744

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.