SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2019
Delayed Colo-anal Anastomosis for Rectal Cancer: Pelvic Morbidity, Functional Results and Oncological Outcomes: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06662643 (A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Staged Turnbull-Cutait Pull-through Anastomosis With Direct Anastomosis Plus Prophylactic Ileostomy in the Treatment of Low Rectal Cancer After Internal Sphincter Resection), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Staged Turnbull-Cutait Pull-through Anastomosis With Direct Anastomosis Plus Prophylactic Ileostomy in the Treatment of Low Rectal Cancer After Internal Sphincter Resection
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical outcomes of Turnbull-Cutait delayed coloanal anastomosis with pull-through versus immediate coloanal anastomosis with diverting stoma after total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of short-term outcomes among hand-sewn, stapled, and two-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through anastomoses in TaTME for low rectal cancer.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Effect of enhanced recovery after surgery-based anesthesia resuscitation on awakening quality in da Vinci robotic rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Short-term outcomes of the "minimal skin incision and no stoma" procedure in needlescopic intersphincteric resection and delayed coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancer.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Review
- Modified pull-through coloanal anastomosis to avoid permanent stomas and reduce postoperative complications for lower rectal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Transplantation of hybrid adipose-derived stem cell sheet with autologous peritoneum: AnHeliyon · 2023Article
- A case of post-operative stenosis caused by colonic ischemia after low anterior resection for rectal cancer, followed by delayed colo-anal anastomosis.Journal of surgical case reports · 2022Article
- Tailored Management with Highly-Selective Diversion for Low Colorectal Anastomosis: Biochemical Postoperative Follow-Up and Long-Term Results from a Single-Institution Cohort.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- Turnbull-Cutait technique without ileostomy after total mesorectal excision is associated with acceptably low early post-operative morbidity.ANZ journal of surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDelayed colo-anal anastomosis (DCAA) has received renewed interest thanks to its reduction in anastomotic leakage rate without the use of stoma to protect a low rectal anastomosis. The aim of this review was to summarize the available literature on DCAA following rectal cancer resection and to report clinical, oncological and functional results.
methodsA comprehensive literature review was conducted including MEDLINE/Pubmed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews through July 2018. The review was conducted according to MOOSE guidelines. Quality was appraised with the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) tool.
resultsEight observational studies (409 patients) were included. Average MINORS score was 9.6/14 in seven non-comparative studies and 17/22 in one comparative study. Six studies reported no anastomotic leak. Pelvic sepsis/abscess ranged from 0 to 25%. Mortality rate was <3% in seven studies and 12.5% in one. Poor fecal continence was reported in <30% of patients. Need for permanent stoma was ≤2% in six studies. A five-year survival rate ranged from 63.8 to 81% (four studies). Loco-regional recurrence rate ranged from 4.8 to 14.3% at 3 years (four studies) and from 6 to 38.8% at 5 years (three studies).
conclusionDCAA offers an alternative to primary straight colo-anal anastomosis for low rectal cancer. The benefits include reduced risk of anastomotic leakage and pelvic sepsis, and no need for protective ileostomy, with good functional and oncological outcomes. Results of ongoing randomized controlled trials comparing DCAA with straight colo-anal anastomosis and protective stoma are awaited to draw definitive conclusions.
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.