ArticleGE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology
Acute Treatment of Malignant Colorectal Occlusion: Real Life Practice.
Article in GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Patients with Gynaecological Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Laparoscopic assisted insertion of a colonic self-expandable metallic stent.Techniques in coloproctology · 2018Article
- Predictors of Complications and Mortality in Patients with Self-Expanding Metallic Stents for the Palliation of Malignant Colonic Obstruction.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
- To Stent or Not to Stent in Colorectal Cancer: That is Still the Question in Gastroenterology!GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionColorectal cancer presents itself as acute bowel occlusion in 10-40% of patients. There are two main therapeutic approaches: urgent surgery and endoluminal placement self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS). AIMS AND
methodsThis study intended to better clarify the risk/benefit ratio of the above-mentioned approaches. We conducted a retrospective longitudinal multicenter study, including 189 patients with acute malignant colorectal occlusion, diagnosed between January 2005 and March 2013.
resultsGlobally (85 patients - 35 bridge-to-surgery and 50 palliative), SEMS's technical success was of 94%. Palliative SEMS had limited clinical success (60%) and were associated with 40% of complications. SEMS occlusion (19%) was the most frequent complication, followed by migration (9%) and bowel perforation (7%). Elective surgery after stenting was associated with a higher frequency of primary anastomosis (94% vs. 76%;
conclusionSEMS placement as a bridge-to-surgery should be considered in the acute treatment of colorectal malignant occlusion, since it displays advantages regarding primary anastomosis, colostomy rate and overall mortality. In contrast, in this study, palliative SEMS did not appear to present significant advantages when compared to decompressive colostomy.
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.