ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2019
External validation of anastomotic leakage risk analysis system in patients who underwent colorectal resection
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk Nomogram Does Not Predict Anastomotic Leakage After Colon Surgery Accurately: Results of the Multi-center LekCheck Study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: One of the most feared complications after colon resection for carcinoma is anastomotic leakage. Prediction of anastomotic leakage can alter pre- and perioperative management of patients. This study validates an anastomotic leakage prediction system. Materials and methods: Ninety-five patients who underwent colonic resection between 1 January 2016 and 30 January 2017 were included in the study. Patient records and electronic charting system data were used to calculate anastomotic leakage risk on the http://www.anastomoticleak.com/ website. Results: Fifty-six (58.9%) patients were male and thirty-nine (41.1%) were female. The mean age was 61.7 (min: 33, max: 90). Six (6.3%) patients had anastomotic leakage. According to the ROC analysis, the area under curve for the prediction system was 0.767. Conclusion: The prediction system for anastomotic leakage produced significant results for our patient population. It can be effectively utilized in preoperative and perioperative measures to prevent anastomotic leakage.
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.