ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2016
Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis: a case-matched analysis from a nationwide database.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- What have we learned in minimally invasive colorectal surgery from NSQIP and NIS large databases? A systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2018Pooled it
- Combined laparoscopic and open colon surgery rankings fail to accurately rank hospitals by surgical-site infection rate.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2023Article
- Rectal Lipoma in an Elderly Male: A Case Report.Cureus · 2020Article
- Two cases of laparoscopic total colectomy with natural orifice specimen extraction and review of the literature.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2017Article
- Laparoscopic resection of a sigmoid colon lipoma in a young female patient: A case report and review of the literature.Oncology letters · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the current study, we aimed to compare peri- and postoperative 30-day outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis in a case-matched design using data procedure-targeted database.
methodsPatients who underwent elective total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis in 2012 and 2013 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of surgical approach (laparoscopic and open). Laparoscopic and open groups were matched (1:1) based on age, gender, diagnosis, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Comorbidities, perioperative, and short-term (30-day) postoperative outcomes were compared between the matched groups.
resultsWe identified 1442 patients-549 in the laparoscopic group and 893 patients in the open group. After case matching, there were 326 patients in each group. There were 48 (14.7%) patients who had conversion in the laparoscopic group. The open group had a higher proportion of patients with ascites [0 (0%) vs. 7 (2.1%) p = 0.015], preoperative weight loss [26 (8.0%) vs. 45 (13.8%) p = 0.018], and contaminated wound classifications [Clean/Contaminated 261 (80%) vs. 240 (74%), Contaminated 55 (16.9%) vs. 54 (16.6%), and Dirty/Infected 8 (2.5%) vs. 28 (8.6%), (p = 0.003)]. The laparoscopic group had a significantly longer operative time (242 ± 98 vs. 202 ± 116 min, p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (9.4 ± 8.5 vs. 13.3 ± 10.7 days, p < 0.001), and lower ileus rate (23.9 vs. 31.0%, p = 0.045) than the open group. After adjusting for covariates, the differences in terms of operative time and hospital stay remained significant [odds ratio (OR): 0.79, confidence interval (CI) 0.74-0.85 and OR 1.36, CI 1.21-1.52, p < 0.001, respectively].
conclusionsLaparoscopic approach for total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis is associated with a shorter hospital stay but longer operative time compared with an open approach.
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.