ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Exploring the risk factors for perineal wound infection after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Perineal wound infection remains a significant complication following abdominoperineal resection (APR), and its associated clinical and financial burden necessitates continued evaluation of modifiable risk factors. This study evaluated surgical and patient-related predictors to inform prevention strategies and postoperative management. Methodology: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 233 consecutive laparoscopic APR procedures performed at a tertiary cancer center between January 2018 and December 2022, examining demographic characteristics, comorbidities, treatment parameters, and operative details. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 26 for descriptive statistics and univariate analysis. Results: The overall infection rate was 21% (49/233). On univariate analysis, significantly higher rates were observed in males (27.7% vs 7.7% in females, Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that technical factors (surgical approach, operative duration) and biological variables (gender) substantially influence infection risk. Given the significant healthcare burden of these infections, enhanced perioperative strategies and improved understanding of risk profiles are essential to optimize outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.