Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32266546›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

Re-operation surgery following IPAA: is there a role for laparoscopy?

Shlomo Yellinek, Hayim Gilshtein, Dimitri Krizzuk, Steven D Wexner

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shlomo YellinekDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Hayim GilshteinDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Dimitri KrizzukDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Steven D WexnerDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA. wexners@ccf.org.
Cleveland Clinic Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRestorative proctocolectomy with ileal J pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the standard of care for mucosal ulcerative colitis and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis. Some patients require re-operation, including pouch revision, advancement, or excision. Re-operative procedures are technically demanding and usually performed only by experienced colorectal surgeons in a small number of referral centers. There is a paucity of data regarding feasibility, safety, and outcomes of laparoscopic re-operative IPAA surgery. This study aimed to determine the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic approach for re-operative IPAA, trans-abdominal surgery.

methodsRetrospective analysis of IRB-approved prospective database for patients who underwent trans-abdominal re-operative IPAA from 2011 to 2018. Patient demographics and operative reports were reviewed to classify type of re-operation into pouch excision, revision, or advancement and further classify as laparoscopic, laparoscopic converted to open, or open surgery. Main outcome measures were post-operative morbidity and mortality.

resultsSeventy-six patients met the inclusion criteria: 19 underwent attempted laparoscopic re-operative IPAA surgery, 12 of whom underwent successful laparoscopic surgery while 7 were converted to laparotomy, for an overall laparoscopic intent to treat 63% success rate. The remaining operations (n = 57) were performed through midline laparotomy. Length of stay (LOS) for patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery was significantly shorter (5.5 vs 9.7 days, p < 0.001) as were abdominal superficial surgical site infections (SSI) (0% vs 18%, p < 0.001) and deep SSI (0% vs 17%, p < 0.001). Laparotomy was performed by 6 colorectal surgeons at our institution while laparoscopy was successfully performed only by the senior author. There was no significant difference in overall complications, re-admission, re-operation, or mortality.

conclusionRe-operative, trans-abdominal, laparoscopic IPAA is both feasible and safe and has clear benefits compared to laparotomy in terms of LOS and superficial and deep SSI. However, this approach needs to be undertaken only by very experienced, high-volume laparoscopic IPAA surgeons.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesFamilial adenomatous polyposisIleal J pouch anal anastomosisIPAALaparoscopyMucosal ulcerative colitisRe-operative IPAA

Identifiers

PMID32266546
OpenAlexW3015059422

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.