Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27247542›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2016

Management of the Perineal Defect after Abdominoperineal Excision.

Colin Peirce, Sean Martin

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Efficacy of Pelvic Peritoneum Closure After Laparoscopic Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Rectal Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. PERINEAL REPAIR AFTER ABDOMINOPERINEAL EXCISION WITH RECTUS ABDOMINIS MYOCUTANEOUS FLAP.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Colin PeirceDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Sean MartinDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
St. Vincent's University Hospital · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optimal management of the perineal defect following abdominoperineal excision for anorectal malignancy remains a source of debate. The repopularization of extralevator resection means colorectal surgeons are confronted with larger perineal wounds. There are several surgical options available-primary perineal closure and drainage, omentoplasty, biological or synthetic mesh placement, musculocutaneous flap repair, and negative wound pressure therapy. These options are discussed along with the potential benefits and complications of each. There remains no consensus on which management strategy is superior; thus, each case must be tailored for each individual patient. Surgical expertise and availability of a multidisciplinary team approach are important considerations.

Indexed as

abdominoperineal excisionextralevatorperineal woundreconstructionrectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID27247542
PMCPMC4882185
OpenAlexW2401322667

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.