SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2020
A systematic review and meta-analysis of diverting loop ileostomy versus total abdominal colectomy for the treatment of Clostridium difficile colitis.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Modeling for Clostridioides difficile Infection: Current State of the Science, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClostridium difficile is an increasingly common source of in-patient morbidity and mortality. We aim to assess the effects of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) versus total abdominal colectomy (TAC) for Clostridium difficile colitis (CDC), in terms of mortality and morbidity.
methodsSystematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for randomized and non-randomized studies comparing DLI and TAC for fulminant CDC. Meta-analysis was carried out for mortality and postoperative complications.
resultsFive non-randomized studies qualified for inclusion in the quantitative synthesis. In total, 3683 patients were allocated to DLI (n = 733) or TAC (n = 2950). The overall mortality was equivalent (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.45-1.20; P = 0.22). Regarding secondary outcomes, the pooled analysis revealed the following equivalent rates of postoperative events: thromboembolism (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.14-1.43; P = 0.18), acute renal failure (OR 1.71; 95% CI 0.91-3.23; P = 0.10), surgical site infection (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.11-8.59; P = 0.97), pneumonia (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.36-2.66; P = 0.97), urinary tract infection (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.26-2.52; P = 0.72), and reoperation (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.50-1.82; P = 0.78). The ostomy reversal rate was significantly higher in DLI (OR 12.55; 95% CI 3.31-47.55; P = 0.0002).
conclusionsThe overall morbidity and mortality rates between DLI and TAC for the treatment of CDC seemed to be equivalent. Evidence from a randomized controlled trial is needed to clarify the timing and understand the impact of DLI for CDC.
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.