Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28059966›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery2017

Readmission After Ileostomy Creation: Retrospective Review of a Common and Significant Event.

Daniel R Fish, Carol A Mancuso, Julio E Garcia-Aguilar, Sang W Lee, Garrett M Nash, Toyooki Sonoda, Mary E Charlson, Larissa K Temple

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Defining Opportunities to Improve Perioperative Ostomy Care and Education.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025
    Article
  18. Preferences for treatment outcomes in rectal cancer: A discrete choice experiment among patients and healthy volunteers.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel R Fish*Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY †Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY.
Carol A Mancuso
Julio E Garcia-Aguilar
Sang W Lee
Garrett M Nash
Toyooki Sonoda
Mary E Charlson
Larissa K Temple
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Weill Cornell Training Program in Health Services ResearchT32HS000066 · AHRQ · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI CHARLSON, MARY E · 1994 to 2018
$4.7M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS000066NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate causes and predictors of readmission after new ileostomy creation.

backgroundNew ileostomates have been reported to have higher readmission rates compared with other surgical patients, but data on predictors are limited.

methodsA total of 1114 records at 2 associated hospitals were reviewed to identify adults undergoing their first ileostomy. Primary outcome was readmission within 60 days of surgery. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors; area under the receiver-operator characteristic curves (AUC) were used to evaluate age-stratified models in secondary analysis.

resultsIn all, 407 patients underwent new ileostomy; 58% had cancer, 31% IBD; 49% underwent LAR, 27% colectomy, and 14% proctocolectomy. Median length of stay was 8 days. Among the patients, 39% returned to hospital, and 28% were readmitted (n = 113) at a median of 12 days postdischarge. The most common causes of readmission were dehydration (42%), intraperitoneal infections (33%), and extraperitoneal infections (29%). Dehydration was associated with later, longer, and repeated readmission. Independent significant predictors of readmission were Clavien-Dindo complication grade 3 to 4 [odds ratio (OR) 6.7], Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.4 per point), and loop stoma (OR 2.2); longer length of stay (OR 0.5) and age 65 years or older (OR 0.4) were protective. Cohort stratification above or below age 65 revealed that older patient readmissions were more predictable (AUC 0.84) with more preventable causes, whereas younger patient readmissions were difficult to predict or prevent (AUC 0.65).

conclusionsReadmissions are most commonly caused by dehydration, and are predicted by serious complications, comorbidity burden, loop stoma, shorter length of stay, and age. Readmissions in older patients are easier to predict, representing an important target for improvement.

Indexed as

IleostomyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsArea Under CurveFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient ReadmissionPostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID28059966
PMCPMC5397251
OpenAlexW2319047555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.