Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23250637›Full record

ReviewTechniques in coloproctology2013

Extracorporeal versus intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis.

S A Stein, R Bergamaschi

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Techniques in coloproctology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The role of robotics in colorectal surgery.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S A SteinDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Stony Brook University Medical Center, State University of New York, HSC Level 18, Rm 046B, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA.
R Bergamaschi
State University of New York · USStony Brook University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This nonsystematic review was performed to evaluate the literature that pertains to laparoscopic right colectomy, focusing on extracorporeal versus intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis. The literature search was performed using PubMed to investigate the current status of research on 3 topics: (1) laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis, (2) laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis, and (3) comparisons of the 2 techniques. Each topic was reviewed, and the most relevant articles were selected for each subheading. Current literature is bringing to the forefront new evidence that laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis can be performed within a comparable time frame as extracorporeal anastomosis and with similar complication rates. Recent reports have presented evidence in which the entire operation is performed intracorporeally by a medial-to-lateral approach with comparable results to those observed in the surgery performed with extracorporeal anastomosis. The advantages of intracorporeal anastomosis are that mobilization of the transverse colon is not necessary, the anastomosis is performed away from the abdominal wall, and there is decreased potential for adhesion formation and a smaller extraction site. Potential disadvantages include intra-abdominal colotomy, requirement of laparoscopic suturing skills, and longer operative time.

Indexed as

Anastomosis, SurgicalColectomyHumansLaparoscopySurgical Instruments

Identifiers

PMID23250637
OpenAlexW2003622637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.