ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2018
Anal and Perineal Injuries.
Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anorectal Manometry in Pediatric Colorectal Surgical Care.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A Novel Sensor System for In Vivo Perception Reconstruction Based on Long Short-Term Memory Networks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- [Surgical reconstruction of traumatic sphincter muscle defects].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2020Review
- Treatment of large avulsion injury in perianal, sacral, and perineal regions by island flaps or skin graft combined with vacuum assisted closure.BMC surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With increased use of explosive devices in warfare, anal trauma is often seen coupled with more complex pelviperineal injury. While the associated mortality is high, casualties that survive are often left with disabling fecal incontinence from damage to the anosphincteric complex. After resolution of the acute insult, the initial evaluation mandates a thorough physical exam, including endoscopic evaluation with rigid proctoscopy and flexible sigmoidoscopy, as well as adjunctive testing, specifically anal manometry and endoanal ultrasound. First-line therapy favors bulking agents and antidiarrheals, in conjunction with biofeedback, due to a minimal risk profile. Surgical options range from direct sphincter repairs to complex anosphincteric reconstruction with widely variable results. Most recently, burgeoning therapies in the treatment of fecal incontinence, including sacral nerve stimulation and magnetic anal sphincters, offer excellent alternatives with promising long-term outcomes. In summation, the goal of all interventions is the re-establishment of bowel continence, but, in its absence, permanent fecal diversion for devastating fecal incontinence is a reasonable option with excellent patient satisfaction scores.
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.