This is not the most recent version of the article. View current version (13 NOV 2015)

Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Surgical versus non-surgical management of abdominal injury

  1. Angela Oyo-Ita1,*,
  2. Udey G Ugare2,
  3. Ikpeme A Ikpeme2

Editorial Group: Cochrane Injuries Group

Published Online: 14 NOV 2012

Assessed as up-to-date: 31 JAN 2012

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007383.pub2


How to Cite

Oyo-Ita A, Ugare UG, Ikpeme IA. Surgical versus non-surgical management of abdominal injury. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD007383. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007383.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Department of Community Health, Calabar, Nigeria

  2. 2

    University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, Department of Surgery, Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria

*Angela Oyo-Ita, Department of Community Health, University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, PMB 1278, Calabar, Nigeria. oyo_ita@yahoo.com.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New
  2. Published Online: 14 NOV 2012

SEARCH

This is not the most recent version of the article. View current version (13 NOV 2015)

 
Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]
Leppaniemi 1996

MethodsRandomised control trial


ParticipantsAll patients with abdominal or lower thoracic stab wound injured in the preceding 48 hours


InterventionsMandatory laparotomy versus selective non-operative management


Outcomes90-day mortality, morbidity, length of hospital stay and cost of care


Notes


Risk of bias

BiasAuthors' judgementSupport for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)Unclear riskSequence generation is not stated

Allocation concealment (selection bias)Low riskAllocation concealed in sealed opaque envelopes

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes
Low riskThere were no incomplete outcome data

Selective reporting (reporting bias)Unclear riskWe contacted the study authors but were unable to obtain the study protocol in order to assess selective reporting.

The authors say: "Indeed, there was a study protocol (in Finnish) but ...I... have destroyed the paper trail after the study was published (as required by our ethics committee instructions)." Personal communication from Ari Leppaniemi 6 October 2012

Other biasHigh riskThe non-surgical intervention group was monitored more closely than the surgical group

 
Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

StudyReason for exclusion

Bitseff 1984Prospective observational study

Croce 1995Prospective observational study

Demetriades 2006Prospective observational study

Heyns 1992Prospective observational study

Liebenberg 1988Prospective observational study

Sherman 1994Prospective observational study

Velmahos 2003Prospective observational study