Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31617094›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

Long-term oncologic outcomes following anastomotic leak after anterior resection for rectal cancer: does the leak severity matter?

Marco Ettore Allaix, Fabrizio Rebecchi, Federico Famiglietti, Simone Arolfo, Alberto Arezzo, Mario Morino

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Anastomotic Leak Following Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marco Ettore AllaixDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Corso A. M. Dogliotti, 14, 10126, Turin, Italy. meallaix@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6206-6644
Fabrizio RebecchiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Corso A. M. Dogliotti, 14, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Federico FamigliettiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Corso A. M. Dogliotti, 14, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Simone ArolfoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Corso A. M. Dogliotti, 14, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Alberto ArezzoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Corso A. M. Dogliotti, 14, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Mario MorinoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Corso A. M. Dogliotti, 14, 10126, Turin, Italy.
University of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe evidence regarding the impact of anastomotic leak (AL) after anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer on oncologic outcomes is controversial, and there are no data about the prognostic relevance of the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer (ISREC) AL classification. The aim was to evaluate the oncologic outcomes in patients with AL after AR for rectal cancer. The prognostic value of the ISREC AL grading system was also investigated.

methodsIt is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database including all patients undergoing curative elective AR for rectal cancer (April 1998-September 2013). AL severity was defined according to the ISREC criteria. A multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of poor survival.

resultsA total of 532 patients underwent curative AR (69% laparoscopic) for rectal cancer. The overall AL rate was 7.9%: 15 grade B and 27 grade C ALs. With a median follow-up of 80 (range 12-266) months, 5-year overall survival (OS) was 67.2% in patients with AL and 86.5% in those without AL (P = 0.001). Five-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 50.5% and 80.3%, respectively (P < 0.001). Local recurrence and distant metastases developed more frequently in AL patients (P < 0.05). Grade B AL and no administration or delay of adjuvant chemotherapy were independent predictors for poorer OS and DFS. Grade B AL independently affected also the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy. Circulating C-reactive protein levels at 2 weeks after AL treatment were higher in grade B than grade C patients (P = 0.006) and in patients with tumor relapse (P = 0.011).

conclusionAL after curative AR for rectal cancer and impaired use of adjuvant chemotherapy are associated with poor survival. Postoperative systemic inflammation seems to be more sustained in grade B than that in grade C AL patients, with possible adverse impact on long-term survival.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAnastomotic LeakChemotherapy, AdjuvantC-Reactive ProteinDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansInflammationMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative ComplicationsProctectomyPrognosisC-Reactive ProteinAnastomotic leakAnterior resectionISREC grading systemRectal cancerSurvival

Identifiers

PMID31617094
OpenAlexW2980667180

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.