ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2017
Functional Disorders: Rectoanal Intussusception.
Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness external rectal prolapse: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of the predictors for recurrence.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- MR Defecography Improves Diagnosis of Postoperative Pelvic Floor Dysfunction After Gynecological Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Transanal minimally invasive (TAMIS) mucosal resection with muscular plication for patients with obstructed defecation syndrome-A prospective pilot study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- The Current Evidence and How-To on Combined Sacrocolpopexy and Rectopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2024Review
- Chronic Constipation Unmasked: A Comprehensive Case Study of Colonic Inertia and Its Future Implications.Cureus · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rectoanal intussusception is an invagination of the rectal wall into the lumen of the rectum. Patients may present with constipation, incomplete evacuation, incontinence, or may be asymptomatic. Defecography has been the gold standard for detection. Magnetic resonance imaging defecography and dynamic anal endosonography are alternatives to conventional defecography. However, both methods are not as sensitive as conventional defecography. Treatment options range from conservative/medical treatment such as biofeedback to surgical procedures such as Delorme, rectopexy, and stapled transanal rectal resection. Recent studies conducted after a trial of failed nonoperative management show adequate results with operations performed for rectal intussusception with or without rectocele if other causes of constipation are not present.
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.