ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2014
Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: resection or no resection? That is the question….
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Techniques in coloproctology - controversies in coloproctology resection: rectopexy is an underutilised procedure in the management of both symptomatic high-grade internal and external rectal prolapse.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Article
- Predictive factors for functional failure of ventral mesh rectopexy in the treatment of rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- Abdominal ventral rectopexy with colectomy for obstructed defecation syndrome: An alternative option for selected patients.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Optimizing Treatment for Rectal Prolapse.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2016Article
- Current status of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external and internal rectal prolapse.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Management of obstructed defecation.World journal of gastroenterology · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24840243What 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.