Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27023628›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of colorectal disease2016

Outcomes of support rod usage in loop stoma formation.

Ian Whiteley, Michael Russell, Natasha Nassar, Marc A Gladman

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of colorectal disease, 2016. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Current Management of Intestinal Stomas and Their Complications.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2020
    Review
  9. Spontaneous ileostomy closure.Saudi medical journal · 2016
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ian WhiteleyAcademic Colorectal Unit, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, 1st Floor Clinical Sciences Building, Building 20, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Hospital Road, Concord, NSW, 2139, Australia.
Michael RussellDepartment of General Surgery, Middlemore Hospital, Middlemore, New Zealand.
Natasha NassarMenzies Centre for Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Marc A GladmanAcademic Colorectal Unit, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, 1st Floor Clinical Sciences Building, Building 20, Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Hospital Road, Concord, NSW, 2139, Australia. m.a.gladman@sydney.edu.au.
The University of Sydney · AUMiddlemore Hospital · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTraditionally, support rods have been used when creating loop stomas in the hope of preventing retraction. However, their effectiveness has not been clearly established. This study aimed to investigate the rate of stoma rod usage and its impact on stoma retraction and complication rates.

methodA prospective cohort of 515 consecutive patients who underwent loop ileostomy/colostomy formation at a tertiary referral colorectal unit in Sydney, Australia were studied. Mortality and unplanned return to theatre rates were calculated. The primary outcome measure of interest was stoma retraction, occurring within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcome measures included early stoma complications. The 10-year temporal trends for rod usage, stoma retraction, and complications were examined.

resultsMortality occurred in 23 patients (4.1 %) and unplanned return to theatre in 4 patients (0.8 %). Stoma retraction occurred in four patients (0.78 %), all without rods. However, the rate of retraction was similar, irrespective of whether rods were used (P = 0.12). There was a significant decline in the use of rods during the study period (P < 0.001) but this was not associated with an increase in stoma retraction rates. Early complications occurred in 94/432 patients (21.8 %) and were more likely to occur in patients with rods (64/223 versus 30/209 without rods, P < 0.001).

conclusionsStoma retraction is a rare complication and its incidence is not significantly affected by the use of support rods. Further, complications are common post-operatively, and the rate appears higher when rods are used. The routine use of rods warrants judicious application. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD TO THE LITERATURE?: It remains unclear whether support rods prevent stoma retraction. This study, the largest to date, confirms that stoma retraction is a rare complication and is not significantly affected by the use of rods. Consequently, routine rod usage cannot be recommended, particularly as it is associated with increased stoma complications.

Indexed as

IleostomySurgical StomasDemographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeComplicationsLoop colostomyLoop ileostomyStomaSupport rods

Identifiers

PMID27023628
OpenAlexW2333083296

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.