Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25215465›Full record

ArticleSurgical infections2014

Proceedings of the first international summit on intestinal anastomotic leak, Chicago, Illinois, October 4-5, 2012.

Benjamin D Shogan, Gary C An, Hans M Schardey, Jeffrey B Matthews, Konstantin Umanskiy, James W Fleshman, Jens Hoeppner, Donald E Fry, Eduardo Garcia-Granereo, Hans Jeekel and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract readConference Proceedings
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical infections, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Involvement of the Commensal OrganismSurgical infections · 2020
    Article
  9. Bowel preparation under siege.The British journal of surgery · 2020
    Review
  10. Microbiome Medicine: This Changes Everything.Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. The gut microbiota and gastrointestinal surgery.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2017
    Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

16 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.

Benjamin D Shogan1 Department of Surgery, University of Chicago , Chicago, Illinois.
Gary C An
Hans M Schardey
Jeffrey B Matthews
Konstantin Umanskiy
James W Fleshman
Jens Hoeppner
Donald E Fry
Eduardo Garcia-Granereo
Hans Jeekel
Harry van Goor
E Patchen Dellinger
Vani Konda
Jack A Gilbert
Gregory W Auner
John C Alverdy
University of Chicago · USBaylor University · USFreiberger Compound Materials (Germany) · DEInstitut für Urheber- und Medienrecht · DENorthwestern University · USRadboud University Nijmegen · NLRotterdam University of Applied Sciences · NLUniversitat de València · ESUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USUniversity of Washington · USWayne State University · US

Funding

Re-Engineering Translational Research at the University of ChicagoUL1TR000430 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI SOLWAY, JULIAN · 2012 to 2016
$20.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000430
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe first international summit on anastomotic leak was held in Chicago in October, 2012 to assess current knowledge in the field and develop novel lines of inquiry. The following report is a summary of the proceedings with commentaries and future prospects for clinical trials and laboratory investigations.

backgroundAnastomotic leakage remains a devastating problem for the patient, and a continuing challenge to the surgeon operating on high-risk areas of the gastrointestinal tract such as the esophagus and rectum. Despite the traditional wisdom that anastomotic leak is because of technique, evidence to support this is weak-to-non-existent. Outcome data continue to demonstrate that expert high-volume surgeons working in high-volume centers continue to experience anastomotic leaks and that surgeons cannot predict reliably which patients will leak.

methodsA one and one-half day summit was held and a small working group assembled to review current practices, opinions, scientific evidence, and potential paths forward to understand and decrease the incidence of anastomotic leak.

resultsRESULTS of a survey of the opinions of the group demonstrated that the majority of participants believe that anastomotic leak is a complicated biologic problem whose pathogenesis remains ill-defined. The group opined that anastomotic leak is underreported clinically, it is not because of technique except when there is gross inattention to it, and that results from animal models are mostly irrelevant to the human condition.

conclusionsA fresh and unbiased examination of the causes and strategies for prevention of anastomotic leak needs to be addressed by a continuous working group of surgeons, basic scientists, and clinical trialists to realize a real and significant reduction in its incidence and morbidity. Such a path forward is discussed.

Indexed as

Anastomotic LeakHumans

Identifiers

PMID25215465
PMCPMC4382716
OpenAlexW1516326316

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.