Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29508050›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018

Loop-ileostomy reversal-patient-related characteristics influencing time to closure.

Carl Pontus Gustafsson, Ulf Gunnarsson, Ursula Dahlstrand, Ulrik Lindforss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Impact of ileostomy in the adjuvant treatment and outcome of colon cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer management.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019
    Review
  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

4 authors.

Carl Pontus GustafssonDepartment of Surgery, Visby Hospital, Gotland, Sweden. kansli@clister.se.
Ulf GunnarssonDepartment of Surgical and Perioperative Science, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Ursula DahlstrandDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, and Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ulrik LindforssDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, and Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Sweden.

Funding

Stockholms Läns Landsting SLL-20160296Västerbotten Läns Landsting VLL-545001, VLL-676051Vetenskapsrådet VR-921-2014-7196
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo identify factors associated with timing of stoma reversal after rectal cancer surgery in a large Swedish register-based cohort.

methodsThree thousand five hundred sixty-four patients with rectal cancer who received a protective stoma during surgery in 2007-2013 were identified in the Swedish colorectal cancer register. Time to stoma reversal was evaluated over a follow-up period of one and a half years. Factors associated with timing of stoma reversal were analysed using Cox regression analysis. Reversal within 9 months (12 months if adjuvant chemotherapy) was considered latest expected time to closure.

resultsStoma reversal was performed in 2954 (82.9%) patients during follow-up. Patients with post-secondary education had an increased chance for early stoma reversal (HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.02-1.25). Postoperative complications (0.67; 0.62-0.73), adjuvant chemotherapy (0.63; 0.57-0.69), more advanced cancer stage (stage III 0.74; 0.66-0.83 and stage IV 0.38; 0.32-0.46) and higher ASA score (0.80; 0.71-0.90 for ASA 3-4) were associated with longer time to reversal. Two thousand four hundred thirty-seven (68.4%) patients had stoma reversal within latest expected time to closure. Factors associated to decreased chance of timely reversal were more advanced cancer stage (stage III 0.64; 0.50-0.81 and stage IV 0.19; 0.13-0.27), postoperative complications (0.50; 0.42-0.59) and higher ASA score (0.77; 0.61-0.96 for ASA 3-4).

conclusionsPatients with a high level of education had a higher chance of timely reversal but medical factors had a stronger association to time to reversal. Patients with advanced rectal cancer are at high risk for non-reversal and should be considered for permanent stoma.

Indexed as

IleostomySurgical StomasAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioPostoperative ComplicationsProportional Hazards ModelsRectal NeoplasmsRisk FactorsDefunctioning stomaLoop-ileostomyLow anterior resectionReversalSocioeconomic factors

Identifiers

PMID29508050
PMCPMC5899111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.