ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2005
The transverse coloplasty pouch.
Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coloplasty Neorectum versus Straight Anastomosis in Low Rectal Cancers.ISRN surgery · 2014Article
- The focus of Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery in the 21st century.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2010Article
- Reconstruction techniques after proctectomy: what's the best?Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe introduction of the total mesorectal excision (TME) and the use of modern staplers have improved outcome and increased the rate of sphincter-preserving low anterior resections in rectal cancer. Consequently, the interest in functional results after rectal reservoir reconstruction increased significantly.
methodsA review of the current literature was conducted on the development of colon pouch procedures with a particular focus on the transverse coloplasty pouch compared with the colon J-pouch and other current techniques of reconstruction after TME such as the side-to-end anastomosis.
resultsThe colon J-pouch (CJP) became the "gold standard" for rectal reservoir reconstruction owing to better early functional results compared with the straight coloanal anastomosis (CAA). However, 30% of the patients with CJP faced late evacuation problems requiring the chronic use of enemas or laxatives. This rate could be decreased by shortening the limb of the CJP from 8-10 to 5-6 cm, but the late evacuation problems remained in approximately 10% of the patients. An overview of the current knowledge on technical and functional aspects as well as indications and results of the transverse coloplasty pouch (TCP) is presented.
conclusionThe TCP was developed to provide early functional results comparable to the CJP while avoiding the late evacuation problems. Functional results after TCP, small colon J-pouch and side-to-end anastomosis are similar. Evacuation problems after TCP have not been reported.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.