Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2013
Laparoscopic versus conventional ileoanal pouch procedure in patients undergoing elective restorative proctocolectomy (LapConPouch Trial)-a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of technical approaches and clinical outcomes.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Role of robotic approach in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA): A systematic review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of robotic colorectal resections for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic literature review.Techniques in coloproctology · 2018Pooled it
- A network meta-analysis comparing laparoscopic, open and robotic restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis [IPAA].Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Pouch outcomes after minimally invasive vs. open proctectomy during IPAA reconstruction.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Benefits of a laparoscopic approach for second colorectal resection after colectomy or proctectomy -a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- Short-term outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery: a propensity score match study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis reduces the risk of surgical site infections: An ACS-NSQIP study.Surgery in practice and science · 2022Article
- Functional outcome and quality of life after transanal minimal invasive pouch surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Article
- The Management of the Hospitalized Ulcerative Colitis Patient, the Medical-Surgical Conundrum.Current gastroenterology reports · 2021Review
- The Management of the Hospitalized Ulcerative Colitis Patient: the Medical-Surgical Conundrum.Current gastroenterology reports · 2020Review
- [Laparoscopic proctocolectomy technique : Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis. Video article].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2017Review
- Laparoscopy for Benign Diseases of the Colon.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2017Review
- Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: A narrative review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2016Review
- Prevalence of laparoscopic surgical treatment and its clinical outcomes in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis in Japan.International journal of clinical oncology · 2016Article
- [Surgical aspects of indications and techniques for adenomatous polyposis variants].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016Review
- Minimally invasive surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: Review of current developments and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2016Review
- Hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch--anal anastomosis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2015Article
- Laparoscopic surgery for ulcerative colitis: a review of the literature.Surgery today · 2015Review
- Occult and Manifest Colorectal Carcinoma in Ulcerative Colitis: How Does It Influence Surgical Decision Making?Viszeralmedizin · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRestorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the standard surgical procedure for ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). While minimal invasive techniques have been applied increasingly, clear evidence of superiority for laparoscopic pouch procedures is not yet available. The aim of the LapConPouch Trial was to compare the effectiveness of laparoscopic (LAP) versus conventional (CON) ileoanal pouch procedure in patients undergoing elective restorative proctocolectomy.
methodsThe trial was designed as a single-centre, pre-operatively randomized, controlled trial using a two-group parallel superiority design. Eligible for participation were patients scheduled for restorative proctocolectomy either for FAP or for UC. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to group assignment. The primary endpoint was defined as the amount of blood loss. Statistical analyses were explorative since the trial had to be stopped prematurely.
resultsA total of 42 patients (21 LAP (50.0 %); 21 CON (50.0 %)) were randomized. The trial had to be stopped prematurely due to insufficient patient recruitment. There was no difference in the amount of blood loss between both groups: LAP 261.5 ± 195.4 ml, CON 228.1 ± 119.5 ml. Secondary endpoints differ in both groups. Laparoscopic surgery was superior regarding the length of skin incision; in contrast, the conventional approach was superior in duration of operation. There were no discrepancies in length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, bowel function, and quality of life between both approaches. The conversion rate from LAP to CON approach was 23.8 %.
conclusionThere was no difference with respect to blood loss between the LAP and the CON group. The LAP approach is feasible for restorative proctocolectomy, and IPAA seems at least as safe as CON surgery. The most obvious advantage of the minimal invasive technique is the improved cosmesis.
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.