Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery-A living systematic review with meta-analyses by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

Published on Jun 26, 2021in Surgery3.356
· DOI :10.1016/J.SURG.2021.04.023
Pascal Probst22
Estimated H-index: 22
(Heidelberg University),
Felix J Hüttner16
Estimated H-index: 16
(Heidelberg University)
+ 42 AuthorsMarco Del Chiaro31
Estimated H-index: 31
(Anschutz Medical Campus)
BACKGROUND Pancreatic surgery is associated with considerable morbidity and, consequently, offers a large and complex field for research. To prioritize relevant future scientific projects, it is of utmost importance to identify existing evidence and uncover research gaps. Thus, the aim of this project was to create a systematic and living Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery. METHODS PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were systematically searched for all randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on pancreatic surgery. Outcomes from every existing randomized controlled trial were extracted, and trial quality was assessed. Systematic reviews were used to identify an absence of randomized controlled trials. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on identical subjects were grouped according to research topics. A web-based evidence map modeled after a mind map was created to visualize existing evidence. Meta-analyses of specific outcomes of pancreatic surgery were performed for all research topics with more than 3 randomized controlled trials. For partial pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, pooled benchmarks for outcomes were calculated with a 99% confidence interval. The evidence map undergoes regular updates. RESULTS Out of 30,860 articles reviewed, 328 randomized controlled trials on 35,600 patients and 332 systematic reviews were included and grouped into 76 research topics. Most randomized controlled trials were from Europe (46%) and most systematic reviews were from Asia (51%). A living meta-analysis of 21 out of 76 research topics (28%) was performed and included in the web-based evidence map. Evidence gaps were identified in 11 out of 76 research topics (14%). The benchmark for mortality was 2% (99% confidence interval: 1%-2%) for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and <1% (99% confidence interval: 0%-1%) for distal pancreatectomy. The benchmark for overall complications was 53% (99%confidence interval: 46%-61%) for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and 59% (99% confidence interval: 44%-80%) for distal pancreatectomy. CONCLUSION The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery, which is freely accessible via www.evidencemap.surgery and as a mobile phone app, provides a regularly updated overview of the available literature displayed in an intuitive fashion. Clinical decision making and evidence-based patient information are supported by the primary data provided, as well as by living meta-analyses. Researchers can use the systematic literature search and processed data for their own projects, and funding bodies can base their research priorities on evidence gaps that the map uncovers.
📖 Papers frequently viewed together
4 Authors (Julie Dionne, ..., Matt Vassar)
15 Citations
6 Citations
#1Julian P T Higgins (UoB: University of Bristol)H-Index: 135
#2Jelena Savović (UoB: University of Bristol)H-Index: 31
Last. Jonathan A C Sterne (UoB: University of Bristol)H-Index: 124
view all 5 authors...
301 CitationsSource
#1Pascal Probst (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 22
#2Felix J Hüttner (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 16
Last. Markus K. DienerH-Index: 48
view all 11 authors...
Introduction Pancreatic surgery is a large and complex field of research. Several evidence gaps exist for specific diseases or surgical procedures. An overview on existing knowledge is needed to plan and prioritise future research. The aim of this project is to create a systematic and living evidence map of pancreatic surgery. Methods and analysis A systematic literature search in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be performed searching ...
5 CitationsSource
#1Pascal Probst (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 22
#2Steffen Zaschke (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 2
Last. Markus K. Diener (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 48
view all 8 authors...
Rationale Blinding reduces performance and detection bias in randomized controlled trials (RCT). There is evidence that lack of blinding leads to overestimation of treatment effects in pharmacological trials. Since surgical trials use interventions with a physical component, blinding is often complicated. The aim of this study was to analyze, in general and abdominal surgery RCT, the status of blinding, the potential for blinding, and the influence of blinding on outcomes.
50 CitationsSource
#1Felix J Hüttner (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 16
#2L. Capdeville (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 1
Last. Markus K. Diener (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 48
view all 8 authors...
BACKGROUND: RCTs are considered the reference standard in clinical research. However, surgical RCTs pose specific challenges and therefore numbers have been lower than those for randomized trials of medical interventions. In addition, surgical trials have often been associated with poor methodological quality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the evolution of quantity and quality of RCTs in pancreatic surgery and to identify evidence gaps. METHODS: PubMed, CENTRAL and Web of Science w...
9 CitationsSource
#1Käthe GoossenH-Index: 3
#2Solveig TenckhoffH-Index: 5
Last. Markus K. Diener (University Hospital Heidelberg)H-Index: 10
view all 7 authors...
Background The aim of the present study was to determine empirically which electronic databases contribute best to a literature search in surgical systematic reviews.
113 CitationsSource
5 CitationsSource
#1Julian Elliott (Monash University)H-Index: 60
#2Anneliese Synnot (La Trobe University)H-Index: 21
Last. James Thomas (UCL: University College London)H-Index: 57
view all 13 authors...
Systematic reviews are difficult to keep up to date, but failure to do so leads to a decay in review currency, accuracy, and utility. We are developing a novel approach to systematic review updating termed "Living systematic review" (LSR): systematic reviews that are continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. LSRs may be particularly important in fields where research evidence is emerging rapidly, current evidence is uncertain, and new research may change p...
184 CitationsSource
#1Claudio BassiH-Index: 110
Last. M.W. Büchler (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 79
view all 33 authors...
Background In 2005, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula developed a definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula that has been accepted universally. Eleven years later, because postoperative pancreatic fistula remains one of the most relevant and harmful complications of pancreatic operation, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification has become the gold standard in defining postoperative pancreatic fistula in clinical practice. The aim of th...
1,355 CitationsSource
#1Marc G. Besselink (UvA: University of Amsterdam)H-Index: 84
#2L. Bengt van Rijssen (UvA: University of Amsterdam)H-Index: 9
Last. Dirk J. Gouma (UvA: University of Amsterdam)H-Index: 101
view all 27 authors...
Background Recent literature suggests that chyle leak may complicate up to 10% of pancreatic resections. Treatment depends on its severity, which may include chylous ascites. No international consensus definition or grading system of chyle leak currently is available. Methods The International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, an international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers, reviewed the literature and worked together to establish a consensus on the defi...
95 CitationsSource
#6Meera Viswanathan (RTP: Research Triangle Park)H-Index: 33
Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (indivi...
3,668 CitationsSource
Cited By1
#1Eric WuH-Index: 1
#2Tousif Kabir (SGH: Singapore General Hospital)H-Index: 8
Last. Brian K. P. Goh (NUS: National University of Singapore)H-Index: 51
view all 4 authors...
Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was introduced to improve the tangential resection margin rates and N1 node clearance following resection of malignancies of the pancreatic body and tail. Owing to its technical complexity, minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS) has only been reported by a few centers worldwide. We performed this meta-analysis to compare both short- and long-term outcomes between open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) and minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS). A systematic search ...