ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018
Elective vs. early elective surgery in diverticular disease: a retrospective study on the optimal timing of non-emergency treatment.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early elective versus elective sigmoid resection in diverticular disease: not only timing matters-a single institutional retrospective review of 133 patients.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study set out to compare the in-hospital outcomes of early elective and elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy due to diverticulitis.
methodsWe examined the data for 378 diverticulitis patients who received an elective laparoscopic sigmoid resection between 2008 and 2012. We divided the patients into two groups: elective (group A, n = 278) and early elective (group B, n = 100). Patients in group A received surgery during the inflammation-free interval, and those in group B immediately after treating the attack with IV antibiotics for a mean period of 8 days (IQR = 3).
resultsOverall mortality was 0%. The mean operation duration was the same in both groups being 77.5 and 80 min respectively. There was no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups, measured using the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complication (CCSC; p = 0.992). A revision due to complications was necessary in 16 cases (group A) and six cases (group B) (p = 0.820). The conversion rate to open surgery was low (six individuals in group A, vs. four in group B; p = 0.331). Patients in group B suffered significantly fewer diverticulitis attacks (three in group A, vs. two in group B; p = 0.026).
conclusionOur study showed no difference in outcome between elective and early elective cases. Operation durations were optimal in both cases and were 50% shorter than those recorded in the literature. An early elective operation represents a good treatment option, especially for patients suffering from complicated diverticulitis.
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.