Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31302816›Full record

SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2019

A standardized use of intraoperative anastomotic testing in colorectal surgery in the new millennium: is technology taking over? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

E Rausa, M A Zappa, M E Kelly, L Turati, A Russo, A Aiolfi, G Bonitta, L G Sgroi

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

E RausaSurgical Oncology Unit, Treviglio Hospital, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, Bergamo, Italy. emarausa@yahoo.it.
M A ZappaDivision of General Surgery, Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Milan, Italy.
M E KellyDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, St James Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
L TuratiSurgical Oncology Unit, Treviglio Hospital, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, Bergamo, Italy.
A RussoSurgical Oncology Unit, Treviglio Hospital, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, Bergamo, Italy.
A AiolfiDepartment of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, Istitituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
G BonittaSurgical Oncology Unit, Treviglio Hospital, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, Bergamo, Italy.
L G SgroiSurgical Oncology Unit, Treviglio Hospital, Piazzale Ospedale 1, 24047, Treviglio, Bergamo, Italy.
Azienda Ospedaliera Treviglio · ITFatebenefratelli Hospital · ITIstituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio · ITSt. James's Hospital · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnastomotic leakage (AL) remains the most challenging complication following colorectal resection. There are several tests that can be used to test anastomotic integrity intraoperatively including air leak testing (ALT) and intraoperative colonoscopy (IOC). Indocyanine green (ICG) can be used to visualise blood supply to the bowel used in the anastomosis. However, there is no consensus internationally regarding routine use and which technique is superior. The aim of this study was to determine which intraoperative anastomotoic leak test (IALT) was most effective in reducing AL.

methodsA systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed. An electronic systematic search was performed using Pubmed, CENTRAL, and Web of Science, of studies comparing ALT, IOC, and ICG. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (a) patients must have had colorectal surgery with formation of an anastomosis; (b) studies must have compared one or more IALTs; (c) and studies must have clear research methodology.

resultsEleven articles totalling 3844 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. Point estimation showed that the AL rate in the control group (no IALT) was significantly higher when compared to the ICG group (RR 0.44; Crl 0.14-0.87) and higher, but without reaching statistical significance, when compared to ALT (RR 0.53; Crl 0.21-1.30) and IOC (RR 0.49; Crl 0.10-1.80). Indirect comparison showed that the AL rate in the ICG group was lower, when compared to both ALT (RR 0.44; Crl 0.14-0.87) and IOC (RR 0.44; Crl 0.14-0.87).

conclusionsThis study suggests that intraoperative testing for a good blood supply using ICG may reduce the AL rate following colorectal surgery.

Indexed as

Anastomosis, SurgicalAnastomotic LeakColonColonoscopyColoring AgentsHumansIndocyanine GreenIntraoperative CareColoring AgentsIndocyanine GreenAnastomotic leakColonoscopyIndocyanine greenPostoperative complication

Identifiers

PMID31302816
OpenAlexW2957718153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.