ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2014
Proctocolectomy for colorectal cancer--is the ileal pouch anal anastomosis a safe alternative to permanent ileostomy?
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Perspectives on Indications for Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis in Older Patients.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Inflammatory bowel disease associated neoplasia: A surgeon's perspective.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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIleal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice in patients requiring surgery for ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). There are few data on reconstruction with the IPAA in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This study assessed the outcomes of the IPAA compared to proctocolectomy and permanent ileostomy (PI) on these patients.
methodsBetween 1983 and 2013, over 2800 patients with CRC have been treated at the Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH). Demographic, surgical, pathological, and outcome data for all patients have been maintained in a database-73 patients were treated for CRC with proctocolectomy: 39 patients with IPAA and 34 patients with PI. Clinical features, pathologic findings, and survival outcomes were compared between these groups.
resultsEach group was similar with respect to gender, stage, and histologic grade. Patients undergoing IPAA were significantly younger. The diagnosis leading to proctocolectomy was more commonly UC or FAP in patients treated with IPAA (39/39 vs. 23/34, p = 0.001). Rectal cancer subgroups were similar in age, sex, TNM stage, T-stage, height of tumor, and histologic grade. There was no significant difference in overall or disease free survival between groups for colon or rectal primaries. Analysis using the Cochran-Armitage trend test suggests that utilization of IPAA has increased over time (p = 0.002).
conclusionsThe IPAA is a viable and safe option to select for patients who would otherwise require PI. Increased experience and improved outcomes following IPAA has led to its more liberal use in selected patients.
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.