Trial reportUpdates in surgery2014
Short-term results after STARR versus internal Delorme for obstructed defecation: a non-randomized prospective study.
Trial report in Updates in surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of obstructed and ineffective defecation syndrome.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Guideline
- Stapled Transanal Rectal Resection (Starr) in the Treatment of Obstructed Defecation: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Management of patients with rectal prolapse: the 2017 Dutch guidelines.Techniques in coloproctology · 2018Guideline
- Time trend in the surgical management of obstructed defecation syndrome: a multicenter experience on behalf of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR).Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- A step-by-step approach to endorectal proctopexy (ERPP): how we do it.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Functional Disorders: Rectocele.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2017Review
- Functional Disorders: Rectoanal Intussusception.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2017Review
- [Indications, technique and results of the STARR procedure].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016Review
- Transanal surgery for obstructed defecation syndrome: Literature review and a single-center experience.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obstructed defecation syndrome due to internal intussusception and rectocele is a common disease, and various transanal surgical techniques have been proposed. Aim of the present study was to compare the internal Delorme (ID) and the stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) results in the treatment of patients with obstructed defecation syndrome. From September 2011 to May 2012, 23 patients were operated with STARR procedure and 12 patients with Delorme's procedure for obstructed defecation syndrome. All patients underwent preoperative assessment: clinical evaluation (Altomare ODS score, Wexner constipation scoring system), proctoscopy, defecography, anorectal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography. Surgery was proposed with: failure of medical therapy, incomplete defecation, and unsuccessful attempts with long periods spent in bathroom, defecation with digital assistance, use of enemas and defecography findings of rectoanal intussusception and rectocele. The average operative time was 28 min (range 15-65) for the STARR group and 56 min (range 28-96) for the ID group with a mean hospital stay of 2 days for both the procedures. The Wexner score significantly fell postoperatively from 17 to 4, 7 in STARR group and from 15.3 to 3.3 in the ID group. The Altomare score postoperatively fell from 18.2 to 5.5 for STARR group and from 16.5 to 5.3 for ID group. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two procedures considering the outcomes parameters and the complications. Both ID and STARR procedure seem to be effective in the treatment of ODS.
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.