Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29881234›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2018

Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Antonio Sciuto, Giovanni Merola, Giovanni D De Palma, Maurizio Sodo, Felice Pirozzi, Umberto M Bracale, Umberto Bracale

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07099820 (Role of Indexed Oxygen Delivery in Anastomotic Insufficiencies in Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Resections for Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 191 papers, 21 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
191citing papers in PubMed, 21 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT07099820 completednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Role of Indexed Oxygen Delivery in Anastomotic Insufficiencies in Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Resections for Cancer: a Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorSaint Camillus International University of Health SciencesRan2020 to 2022Enrolled100ConditionsAnastomosis, Complications, Anastomosis, Surgical, Anastomosis, Leaking
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

191 citing papers in PubMed, 21 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 345 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. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Obesity and anastomotic leak rates in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

131 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Antonio SciutoDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Research Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo 71013, Italy.
Giovanni MerolaDepartment of General Surgery, Casa di Cura Villa Berica, Vicenza 36100, Italy.
Giovanni D De PalmaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Endocrinology and Endoscopic Surgery, University Hospital of Naples Federico II, Naples 80131, Italy.
Maurizio SodoDepartment of Public Health, University of Naples Federico II, Naples 80131, Italy.
Felice PirozziDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Research Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo 71013, Italy.
Umberto M BracaleDepartment of Public Health, University of Naples Federico II, Naples 80131, Italy.
Umberto BracaleDepartment of Gastroenterology, Endocrinology and Endoscopic Surgery, University Hospital of Naples Federico II, Naples 80131, Italy. umberto.bracale@unina.it.
University of Naples Federico II · ITCasa Sollievo della Sofferenza · ITFederico II University Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Every colorectal surgeon during his or her career is faced with anastomotic leakage (AL); one of the most dreaded complications following any type of gastrointestinal anastomosis due to increased risk of morbidity, mortality, overall impact on functional and oncologic outcome and drainage on hospital resources. In order to understand and give an overview of the AL risk factors in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, we carried out a careful review of the existing literature on this topic and found several different definitions of AL which leads us to believe that the lack of a consensual, standard definition can partly explain the considerable variations in reported rates of AL in clinical studies. Colorectal leak rates have been found to vary depending on the anatomic location of the anastomosis with reported incidence rates ranging from 0 to 20%, while the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resections has not yet been associated with a significant reduction in AL incidence. As well, numerous risk factors, though identified, lack unanimous recognition amongst researchers. For example, the majority of papers describe the risk factors for left-sided anastomosis, the principal risk being male sex and lower anastomosis, while little data exists defining AL risk factors in a right colectomy. Also, gut microbioma is gaining an emerging role as potential risk factor for leakage.

Indexed as

Anastomosis, SurgicalAnastomotic LeakColonColonic DiseasesColorectal SurgeryGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansIncidenceLaparoscopyPerioperative PeriodRectumRisk FactorsAnastomotic leakageColorectal surgeryDiverting stomaLaparoscopic colorectal surgeryLaparoscopyRectal cancerRisk factor

Identifiers

PMID29881234
PMCPMC5989239
OpenAlexW2805659832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.