ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2020
A global survey of surgeons' preferences and practice with regard to laxative use after elective colorectal surgery.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spinal anesthesia in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: analgesia and recovery outcomes - a cohort study and systematic review of randomized controlled studies.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of gastrointestinal motility agents following elective colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe role of laxatives after elective colorectal surgery is unclear, resulting in heterogenous guidelines and variability in clinical practice. This study aimed to gauge surgeons' preferences and practice with regard to laxative use following elective colorectal surgery.
methodsA short one-minute anonymous web-based questionnaire designed in English and Chinese (Mandarin) using the Research Electronic Data Capture application (REDCap) was distributed to member surgeons of every identifiable international colorectal specialist society via email communication, physical newsletters and social media channels. Frequency of laxative use after elective colorectal surgery, type of laxative used, and, if not used, the reasons for not using laxatives were collected.
resultsA total of 852 surgeons, representing 28 surgical societies completed the survey: 80% were colorectal surgeons and 20% were general surgeons with colorectal interest. Twenty-seven percent of the respondents routinely prescribed laxatives after colorectal surgery. There was wide variation in the type of laxatives used, with magnesium-based laxatives (42%), macrogol (Movicol, 36%) and lactulose (Duphalac, 22%) being the most common. Geographical location was correlated with choice of laxative. Those not routinely using laxatives stated the reasons as being no evidence for benefit (48%), potential of adverse events (24%), more than one reason (21%) and other (7%). The majority (93%) non-users would consider using laxatives if better evidence was available.
conclusionMost surgeons do not routinely prescribe laxatives after elective colorectal surgery due to lack of evidence. Amongst those surgeons who do use them, there is wide variability in the type of laxatives used.
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.