Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29755692›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2018

Defunctioning ileostomy reduces leakage rate in rectal cancer surgery - systematic review and meta-analysis.

Magdalena Pisarska, Natalia Gajewska, Piotr Małczak, Michał Wysocki, Jan Witowski, Grzegorz Torbicz, Piotr Major, Magdalena Mizera, Marcin Dembiński, Marcin Migaczewski and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. The ILEOSTIM trial: A multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating the impact of efferent loop stimulation prior to ileostomy reversal on postoperative ileus.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Understanding risk factors for low anterior resection syndrome in a South American cohort.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Magdalena Pisarska2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Natalia Gajewska2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Piotr Małczak2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Michał Wysocki2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Jan Witowski2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Grzegorz Torbicz2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Piotr Major2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Magdalena Mizera2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Marcin Dembiński2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Marcin Migaczewski2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Andrzej Budzyński2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Michał Pędziwiatr2 Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Jagiellonian University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe role of a defunctioning ileostomy in every anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is still controversial. In this study, we aimed to review the current literature to determine the impact of ileostomy creation on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing anterior rectal resection with TME.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. We analyzed data up to October 2017. Eligible studies had to compare patients with vs. without a defunctioning ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery and comprise data on anastomotic leakage in both groups. The primary outcome was anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcomes included the complication rate, mortality, reoperation rate, length of hospital stay and 30-day readmission.

resultsInitial search yielded 1,966 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 13 eligible articles which were analyzed. Leakage rate (RR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.67) and the number of reoperations (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.94) were significantly lower in the defunctioning stoma group. Morbidity was significantly higher in the stoma group (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.65). Analysis of mortality, length of hospital stay and readmission rate did not show any significant differences.

conclusionA defunctioning ileostomy may decrease the anastomotic leakage rate, additionally significantly reducing the risk of reoperations but it may also increase the overall complication rate. The presence of the protective stoma has no effect on mortality, length of hospital stay and readmission rate.

Indexed as

defunctioning ileostomyleakagemeta-analysisrectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID29755692
PMCPMC5945534
OpenAlexW2799869719

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.