ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Who needs diverting ileostomy following laparoscopic low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients? Analysis of 417 patients in a single institute.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of laparoscopic intracorporeal reinforcing sutures to prevent anastomotic leakage: A meta-analysis.Saudi medical journal · 2025Pooled it
- The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Early versus late closure of temporary ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis.Surgery today · 2021Pooled it
- Prophylactic ileostomy vs. nonprophylactic ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer (PILLAR): a prospective, multicenter, cohort study in china.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Article
- Construction and external validation of a predictive model for permanent stoma after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Building a risk prediction model for anastomotic leakage postoperative low rectal cancer based on Lasso-Logistic regression.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Machine learning prediction model of prolonged delay to loop ileostomy closure after rectal cancer surgery: a retrospective study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical using of innovative biodegradable stent with extension sleeve in Ta_tme for low rectal cancer with high risk of anastomotic leakage.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes between high and low tie ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery in robotic rectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Outcomes of loop ileostomy after rectal resection for cancer: A prospective observational multicenter snapshot study from Multidisciplinary Italian Study group for STOmas (MISSTO).Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Observational
- What affects the selection of diverting ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery: a single-center retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- The effect of reinforcing sutures and trans-anal drainage tube on the outcome of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: propensity score‑matched analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Obstructive and secretory complications of diverting ileostomy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA oncology · 2022Article
- Trans-Anastomotic Drainage Tube Placement After Hand-Sewn Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: An Alternative Drainage Method.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Effects of Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy on Postoperative Complications in Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of oncology · 2022Article
- The risk factors of low anterior resection syndrome after colorectal cancer surgery: A retrospective study of 566 patients in a single institution in China.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Retrospective study of active drainage in the management of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes in Mid and Low Rectal Cancer With Robotic Surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most serious complications after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer, and the significance of diverting stoma to prevent AL is still controversial. The aim of this study is to clarify the potential benefits and safety of diverting ileostomy (DI) following laparoscopic LAR in rectal cancer patients.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 417 rectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR in a single institute. The risk factors for AL and the DI-related morbidity were assessed.
resultsDI was performed in 226 patients (54.2%). The incidence rates of symptomatic AL showed no significant difference between patients with and without DI (8.4% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.612). AL requiring a surgical intervention was relatively lower in patients with DI than in those without DI (1.8% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.097). DI construction was an independent risk factor for AL requiring a surgical intervention (OR 3.47, p = 0.041), as was the serum albumin level (p = 0.003), and being male was a relative risk factor (p = 0.058). Focusing on sex, the rate of AL requiring a surgical intervention was significantly different in male (1.7 and 7.9%, p = 0.021) but not in female patients (1.9 and 1.1%, p = 1.000) with and without DI. The DI construction-related morbidity was 9.7%, and no patient required a reoperation. Of 226 patients with DI, 209 (92.5%) underwent stoma closure 118 days (median 30-509 days) after LAR. The stoma closure-related morbidity was 9.1% and 1 patient (0.5%) required a reoperation due to anastomotic leakage.
conclusionsDI following laparoscopic LAR can decrease the risk of AL, requiring a surgical intervention, especially in male patients with malnutrition. However, due to DI-related morbidity, DI is not recommended in female patients.
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.