Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27194409›Full record

ReviewFamilial cancer2016

Surgical considerations in FAP-related pouch surgery: Could we do better?

Gabriela Möslein

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Familial cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pouch cancer in familial adenomatous polyposis. Incidence, risk factors and literature review: a propos of three rare cases.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Surgical Decision-Making in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. [Influence of molecular markers on oncological surgery of colorectal cancer].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gabriela MösleinCenter for Hereditary Tumors, HELIOS-Klinikum Wuppertal, University Hospital Witten-Herdecke, Heusnerstr. 40, 42283, Wuppertal, Germany. gabriela.moeslein@helios-kliniken.de.
Helios Universitätsklinikum Wuppertal · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ileoanal pouch has become the standard restorative procedure of choice for patients with the classical phenotype in FAP (familial adenomatous polyposis) and also for ulcerative colitis (UC). Whilst we tend to encounter descriptive analyses comparing functional outcome, fertility and quality of life (QOL) between series in literature, there may be an urgent need to discuss the subtle technical modifications that may be pivotal for improving long-term QOL in FAP patients. Our aim is to review the current literature and discuss the aspects of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis that may require specific reevaluation for FAP. Surgical strategies aimed at minimizing post-interventional desmoid growth is one of the most important aspects. For this study, the following topics of interest were selected: Timing of surgery, IRA or ileoanal pouch for classical FAP, laparoscopic or conventional surgery, TME or mesenteric dissection, preservation of the ileocolic vessels, handsewn or double-staple anastomosis, shape and size of pouch, protective ileostomy, Last and definitely not least: how to manage desmoid plaques or desmoids at the time of prophylactic surgery. For the depicted technicalities of the procedure, a review of recent literature was performed and evaluated. For the topics selected, only sparse reference in literature was identified that was focused on the specific condition situation of FAP. Almost all pouch literature focusses on the procedural aspects, and FAP patients are always a very minor number. Therefore it becomes obvious that the specific entity is not adequately taken into account. This is a serious bias for identification of important steps in the procedure that may be beneficial for patients with either of the diseases. The results of this study demonstrate that several technical differences for construction of ileoanal pouches in FAP patients deserve more attention and prospective evaluation-perhaps even randomized trials. The role, importance and potential benefit or deterioration of outcome in most of the discussed technicalities remains unclear to date. Significant differences between the underlying diseases (UC and FAP) have not been taken into consideration, such as specifically the management of precursor desmoid lesions at the time of prophylactic surgery as well as prevention of desmoid tumors. Several of the aspects discussed in this paper should be prospectively evaluated in larger and exclusive series of FAP patients.

Indexed as

Colonic PouchesAdenomatous Polyposis ColiAnastomosis, SurgicalColitis, UlcerativeDesmoid TumorsFemaleFertilityHumansLaparoscopyPostoperative ComplicationsProctocolectomy, RestorativeProphylactic Surgical ProceduresQuality of LifeTime-to-TreatmentTreatment OutcomeAggressive fibromatosisDesmoid tumorFamilial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)Ileoanal pouchProphylactic proctocolectomy

Identifiers

PMID27194409
OpenAlexW2405684351

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.