Key result
In patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies, damage-control surgery did not significantly differ in mortality compared to conventional surgery (risk difference 0.09; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.24).
Why the study?
Damage-control surgery is increasingly used in nontraumatic emergencies after success in trauma, but its role and effect on mortality in nontraumatic settings are not well defined.
Does damage-control surgery reduce mortality in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies compared to conventional surgery?
Comparison
Nontrauma damage-control surgery vs conventional surgery or expected mortality
Design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of five nonrandomized prospective and 16 retrospective studies
Authors
Loading...
DCS effect on mortality in nontraumatic abdominal emergencies remains unclear; leaves open need for prospective RCTs before any practice change.
Meta-Analysis (n=2,174)
Does damage-control surgery reduce mortality in patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies compared to conventional surgery?
Effect estimate: risk difference 0.09 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.24)
In patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies, damage-control surgery did not significantly reduce mortality compared to conventional surgery, though observed mortality was lower than expected.
Haltmeier et al. (2021) conducted a meta-analysis in Nontraumatic abdominal emergencies (n=2,174). Damage-control surgery (DCS) vs. Conventional surgery (CS) was evaluated on Mortality (risk difference 0.09, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.24). In patients with nontraumatic abdominal emergencies, damage-control surgery did not significantly differ in mortality compared to conventional surgery (risk difference 0.09; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.24).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: