This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (42)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Randomized Prospective Study

H. Leon Pachter, MD; Steven R. Hofstetter, MD

Arch Surg. 1981;116(3):318-319.

Abstract
• To compare the accuracy and safety of open abdominal paracentesis and lavage vs percutaneous paracentesis and lavage, 210 consecutive patients were prospectively randomized into two groups of 105 each. There were no false-negative diagnoses in either group. The accuracy rate for the open method was 98.1%, and 91.4% for the percutaneous method. Six major complications were encountered with the percutaneous method, for a complication rate of 5.7% compared with no major complications with the open method. The results suggest that the open technique is superior to the percutaneous method.

(Arch Surg 1981;116:318-319)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, New York University Medical Center, and the Trauma and Shock Unit, Bellevue Hospital Center, New York.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication Nov 5, 1980.

Reprint requests to New York University Medical Center, 530 First Ave, New York, NY 10016 (Dr Pachter).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Ultrasonography in the Management of Blunt Abdominal and Thoracic Trauma
Glaser et al.
Arch Surg 1994;129:743-747.
ABSTRACT