ReviewDrugs & aging2015
Diverticular disease: changing epidemiology and management.
Review in Drugs & aging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Menopause and gastrointestinal health and disease.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Review
- Article
- The connection between diverticulosis and colonic superficial neoplastic lesions in patients who underwent screening colonoscopy.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Association between serum uric acid levels and colonic diverticulosis in terms of sex.PloS one · 2022Article
- Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Risk of Diverticulitis.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Sex differences in risk factors of uncomplicated colonic diverticulosis in a metropolitan area from Northern China.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Increased Risk of Pyogenic Liver Abscess Among Patients With Colonic Diverticular Diseases: A Nationwide Cohort Study.Medicine · 2015Observational
- Paradigm shift: the Copernican revolution in diverticular disease.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diverticulosis is the most common pathological finding in routine colonoscopy. Diverticular disease comprises both diverticulitis and diverticular hemorrhage. This review examines the pathophysiological basis for disease including the importance of the elastin/collagen profile in diverticula formation. It summarizes the latest epidemiological findings with an emphasis on age- and sex-related differences. Risk factors including obesity, medications, hereditary factors, and diet are critically reviewed with the most up-to-date evidence. A detailed appraisal of therapeutic options is provided with special emphasis on 5-aminosalicylate, probiotics, mesalamine, percutaneous abscess drainage, and image-guided embolization. The role of antibiotics and surgery is discussed and compared with guideline recommendations. A more conservative approach, averting admission and even antibiotics, is explored. Finally, a careful review of the data surrounding the utility of colonoscopy in diagnosis and management is provided given the increasing number of reports citing the low incidence of colorectal neoplasia after an episode of diverticulitis. Throughout the review we focus on the older patient with diverticular disease.
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.