Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study

Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Gu, Guosheng [verfasserIn] Ren, Jianan Liu, Song Li, Guanwei Yuan, Yujie Chen, Jun Han, Gang Ren, Huajian Hong, Zhiwu Yan, Dongsheng Wu, Xiuwen Li, Ning Li, Jieshou

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2015

Schlagwörter:	Percutaneous catheter drainage Operative drainage Sump drainage Trocar puncture Intra-abdominal abscesses

Anmerkung:	© Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: BMC surgery - London : BioMed Central, 2001, 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:15 ; year:2015 ; number:1 ; day:09 ; month:05

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6

Katalog-ID:	SPR028107373

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR028107373
003	DE-627
005	20230519215827.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR028107373
035			\|a (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Gu, Guosheng \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
264		1	\|c 2015
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
520			\|a Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future.
650		4	\|a Percutaneous catheter drainage \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Operative drainage \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Sump drainage \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Trocar puncture \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Intra-abdominal abscesses \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Ren, Jianan \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Liu, Song \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Li, Guanwei \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Yuan, Yujie \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Chen, Jun \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Han, Gang \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Ren, Huajian \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Hong, Zhiwu \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Yan, Dongsheng \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Wu, Xiuwen \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Li, Ning \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Li, Jieshou \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t BMC surgery \|d London : BioMed Central, 2001 \|g 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai \|w (DE-627)331018837 \|w (DE-600)2050442-1 \|x 1471-2482 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:15 \|g year:2015 \|g number:1 \|g day:09 \|g month:05
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 15 \|j 2015 \|e 1 \|b 09 \|c 05

Indexfelder

author_variant	g g gg j r jr s l sl g l gl y y yy j c jc g h gh h r hr z h zh d y dy x w xw n l nl j l jl
matchkey_str	article:14712482:2015----::oprtveautoosmdangbtoapntrpruaeucteedangvruoeaieriaenhtetetfnrad
hierarchy_sort_str	2015
publishDate	2015
allfields	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 doi (DE-627)SPR028107373 (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gu, Guosheng verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. Percutaneous catheter drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Operative drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sump drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trocar puncture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Intra-abdominal abscesses (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ren, Jianan aut Liu, Song aut Li, Guanwei aut Yuan, Yujie aut Chen, Jun aut Han, Gang aut Ren, Huajian aut Hong, Zhiwu aut Yan, Dongsheng aut Wu, Xiuwen aut Li, Ning aut Li, Jieshou aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 15 2015 1 09 05
spelling	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 doi (DE-627)SPR028107373 (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gu, Guosheng verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. Percutaneous catheter drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Operative drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sump drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trocar puncture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Intra-abdominal abscesses (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ren, Jianan aut Liu, Song aut Li, Guanwei aut Yuan, Yujie aut Chen, Jun aut Han, Gang aut Ren, Huajian aut Hong, Zhiwu aut Yan, Dongsheng aut Wu, Xiuwen aut Li, Ning aut Li, Jieshou aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 15 2015 1 09 05
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 doi (DE-627)SPR028107373 (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gu, Guosheng verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. Percutaneous catheter drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Operative drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sump drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trocar puncture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Intra-abdominal abscesses (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ren, Jianan aut Liu, Song aut Li, Guanwei aut Yuan, Yujie aut Chen, Jun aut Han, Gang aut Ren, Huajian aut Hong, Zhiwu aut Yan, Dongsheng aut Wu, Xiuwen aut Li, Ning aut Li, Jieshou aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 15 2015 1 09 05
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 doi (DE-627)SPR028107373 (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gu, Guosheng verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. Percutaneous catheter drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Operative drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sump drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trocar puncture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Intra-abdominal abscesses (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ren, Jianan aut Liu, Song aut Li, Guanwei aut Yuan, Yujie aut Chen, Jun aut Han, Gang aut Ren, Huajian aut Hong, Zhiwu aut Yan, Dongsheng aut Wu, Xiuwen aut Li, Ning aut Li, Jieshou aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 15 2015 1 09 05
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 doi (DE-627)SPR028107373 (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Gu, Guosheng verfasserin aut Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. Percutaneous catheter drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Operative drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sump drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trocar puncture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Intra-abdominal abscesses (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ren, Jianan aut Liu, Song aut Li, Guanwei aut Yuan, Yujie aut Chen, Jun aut Han, Gang aut Ren, Huajian aut Hong, Zhiwu aut Yan, Dongsheng aut Wu, Xiuwen aut Li, Ning aut Li, Jieshou aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 15 2015 1 09 05
language	English
source	Enthalten in BMC surgery 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05
sourceStr	Enthalten in BMC surgery 15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai volume:15 year:2015 number:1 day:09 month:05
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Percutaneous catheter drainage Operative drainage Sump drainage Trocar puncture Intra-abdominal abscesses
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	BMC surgery
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Gu, Guosheng @@aut@@ Ren, Jianan @@aut@@ Liu, Song @@aut@@ Li, Guanwei @@aut@@ Yuan, Yujie @@aut@@ Chen, Jun @@aut@@ Han, Gang @@aut@@ Ren, Huajian @@aut@@ Hong, Zhiwu @@aut@@ Yan, Dongsheng @@aut@@ Wu, Xiuwen @@aut@@ Li, Ning @@aut@@ Li, Jieshou @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2015-05-09T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	331018837
id	SPR028107373
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR028107373</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519215827.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR028107373</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gu, Guosheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Percutaneous catheter drainage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Operative drainage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sump drainage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Trocar puncture</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Intra-abdominal abscesses</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ren, Jianan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Song</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Guanwei</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yuan, Yujie</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chen, Jun</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Han, Gang</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ren, Huajian</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hong, Zhiwu</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan, Dongsheng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wu, Xiuwen</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Ning</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Jieshou</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:15</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:09</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">15</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">09</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Gu, Guosheng
spellingShingle	Gu, Guosheng misc Percutaneous catheter drainage misc Operative drainage misc Sump drainage misc Trocar puncture misc Intra-abdominal abscesses Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
authorStr	Gu, Guosheng
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)331018837
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1471-2482
topic_title	Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study Percutaneous catheter drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Operative drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Sump drainage (dpeaa)DE-He213 Trocar puncture (dpeaa)DE-He213 Intra-abdominal abscesses (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Percutaneous catheter drainage misc Operative drainage misc Sump drainage misc Trocar puncture misc Intra-abdominal abscesses
topic_unstemmed	misc Percutaneous catheter drainage misc Operative drainage misc Sump drainage misc Trocar puncture misc Intra-abdominal abscesses
topic_browse	misc Percutaneous catheter drainage misc Operative drainage misc Sump drainage misc Trocar puncture misc Intra-abdominal abscesses
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	BMC surgery
hierarchy_parent_id	331018837
hierarchy_top_title	BMC surgery
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1
title	Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR028107373 (SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e
title_full	Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
author_sort	Gu, Guosheng
journal	BMC surgery
journalStr	BMC surgery
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2015
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Gu, Guosheng Ren, Jianan Liu, Song Li, Guanwei Yuan, Yujie Chen, Jun Han, Gang Ren, Huajian Hong, Zhiwu Yan, Dongsheng Wu, Xiuwen Li, Ning Li, Jieshou
container_volume	15
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Gu, Guosheng
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6
title_sort	comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
title_auth	Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
abstract	Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
abstractGer	Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
abstract_unstemmed	Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future. © Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6
remote_bool	true
author2	Ren, Jianan Liu, Song Li, Guanwei Yuan, Yujie Chen, Jun Han, Gang Ren, Huajian Hong, Zhiwu Yan, Dongsheng Wu, Xiuwen Li, Ning Li, Jieshou
author2Str	Ren, Jianan Liu, Song Li, Guanwei Yuan, Yujie Chen, Jun Han, Gang Ren, Huajian Hong, Zhiwu Yan, Dongsheng Wu, Xiuwen Li, Ning Li, Jieshou
ppnlink	331018837
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6
up_date	2024-07-03T17:20:11.326Z
_version_	1803579253147566080
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR028107373</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519215827.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2015 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR028107373</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12893-015-0049-6-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gu, Guosheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Gu et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Intra-abdominal and pelvic abscesses are common and result from various illnesses. Percutaneous drainage applies limitedly to well-localized abscesses with appropriate density while surgical drainage usually causes significant physiological disturbance. We herein illustrated an innovative choice “sump drainage with trocar puncture” for the management of intra-abdominal abscesses and compare it with conventional percutaneous and surgical drainage in terms of clinical outcomes and prognosis. Methods Medical records of a total of 75 patients with abscesses were retrospectively retrieved and scrutinized. Data consisted of demographics, abscesses characteristics and treatment outcomes including postoperative complication, duration of hospitalization, postoperative recurrence of abscesses, subsequent surgery, ultimate stoma creation and survival rate. All enrolled patients were divided into trocar group (n = 30), percutaneous group (n = 20) and surgical group (n = 25) according to the therapeutic modalities. One-way ANOVA and t-test with Welch’s correction were used in continuous variables, and Chi-squared test as well as Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. The cumulative incidence of subsequent surgery and ultimate stoma creation was also indicated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results The risk of ultimate stoma creation (p = 0.0069) and duration of postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.0077) were significantly decreased in trocar group compared with the surgical group. Patients receiving trocar puncture also tended to be less likely to have subsequent surgery (p = 0.097). Patients in trocar group displayed a lower rate of postoperative complication than the percutaneous (p = 0.0317) and surgical groups (p = 0.0175). As for Kaplan–Meier analysis, the cumulative incidence of ultimate stoma creation of the patients using sump drainage was also significantly different among three groups during follow-up period (p = 0.011). Conclusion This novel technique “sump drainage by trocar puncture” could produce better clinical outcomes and prognosis than conventional percutaneous drainage and surgical intervention. It might become an optimal choice in the management of intra-abdominal abscesses in the future.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Percutaneous catheter drainage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Operative drainage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Sump drainage</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Trocar puncture</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Intra-abdominal abscesses</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ren, Jianan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Song</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Guanwei</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yuan, Yujie</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chen, Jun</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Han, Gang</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ren, Huajian</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hong, Zhiwu</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yan, Dongsheng</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wu, Xiuwen</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Ning</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Li, Jieshou</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">15(2015), 1 vom: 09. Mai</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:15</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:09</subfield><subfield code="g">month:05</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-015-0049-6</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">15</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">09</subfield><subfield code="c">05</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4001894

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Comparative evaluation of sump drainage by trocar puncture, percutaneous catheter drainage versus operative drainage in the treatment of Intra-abdominal abscesses: a retrospective controlled study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?