Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32613380›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2020

Italian multi-society modified Delphi consensus on the definition and management of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery.

Antonino Spinelli, Gabriele Anania, Alberto Arezzo, Stefano Berti, Francesco Bianco, Paolo Pietro Bianchi, Maurizio De Giuli, Paola De Nardi, Paolo de Paolis, Caterina Foppa and 11 more

Abstract readConsensus Statement
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Clinical progress and prospects of biodegradable intestinal stents.American journal of translational research · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

21 authors at 16 institutions in 1 country.

Antonino SpinelliDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. antonino.spinelli@hunimed.eu.
Gabriele AnaniaDipartimento di Scienze Mediche-Università di Ferrara, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria S. Anna, Ferrara, Italy.
Alberto ArezzoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Stefano BertiS.C. Chirurgia Generale, Dipartimento Chirurgico, ASL 5 Spezzino-POLL-Regione Liguria, La Spezia, Italy.
Francesco BiancoGeneral and Colo-Rectal Surgery Unit, S. Leonardo-ASL Naples 3 Hospital, C.mare di Stabia, Naples, Italy.
Paolo Pietro BianchiUOC di Chirurgia Generale e Mini-Invasiva, Dipartimento di Chirurgia Generale e Specialistiche, ASL Toscana Sud-Est. Ospedale Misericordia, Grosseto, Italy.
Maurizio De GiuliDepartment of Oncology, Head, Digestive and Surgical Oncology, University of Torino, and San Luigi University Hospital, Orbassano, Italy.
Paola De NardiGastrointestinal Surgery, Scientific Institute San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Paolo de PaolisCittà della Salute-Ospedale Molinette, Torino, Italy.
Caterina FoppaDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Mario GuerrieriClinica Chirurgica Generale e d'urgenza, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Pierluigi MariniSurgery Unit, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Roberto PersianiMinimally-Invasive Surgical Oncology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University, Rome, Italy.
Diego PiazzaU.O.C. Chirurgia Oncologica, ARNAS Garibaldi, Catania, Italy.
Gilberto PoggioliDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Salvatore PucciarelliDipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche Oncologiche e Gastroenterologiche-DISCOG, Università di Padova, Padova, Italy.
Domenico D'UgoGeneral Surgery Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University, Rome, Italy.
Adolfo RenziDepartment of General Surgery, Fatebenefratelli Hospital, Naples, Italy.
Francesco SelvaggiColorectal Surgery, Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Gianfranco SilecchiaDeparment of Medico-Surgical Science and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Marco MontorsiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITUniversity of Turin · ITAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITArcispedale Sant'Anna · ITCarlo Forlanini Hospital · ITFatebenefratelli Hospital · ITFondazione Ricerca Molinette · ITHumanitas University · ITMarche Polytechnic University · ITOspedale Garibaldi · ITOspedale Misericordia - Grosseto · ITRegione LiguriaSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversity of Bologna · ITUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe incidence of anastomotic leak (AL) has not decreased over the past decades and some important grey areas remain in its definition, prevention, and management. The aim of this study was to reach a national consensus on the definition of AL and to identify key points to be applied in clinical practice.

methodsA 3-step modified Delphi method was used to establish consensus. Ten representative members of the major Italian surgical scientific societies with proven colorectal expertise were selected after a call to action. After a comprehensive literature search, each expert drew a list of evidence-based statements which were voted in round one by the scientific board. Panel members were asked to mark "totally disagree", "partially agree" or "totally agree" for each statement and provide comments. The same voting method was used for round 2. Round 3 consisted of a final face-to-face meeting.

resultsThirty-three statements (clustered into 14 topics) were included in round 1. Following the third voting round, a final list of 16 items was formulated, which encompass the following 9 topics: AL definition, patient- and operative-related risk factors, prevention measures, bowel preparation, surgical technique, intraoperative assessment, early diagnosis, radiological diagnosis and management of specific patterns of AL. The overall response rate was 100% for all items in all the three rounds.

conclusionsThis Delphi survey identified items that expert colorectal surgeons agreed were important to be applied in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of AL. This represents the first consensus involving all relevant national scientific societies, defining important and shared concepts in the diagnosis and management of AL.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueAnastomotic LeakColorectal SurgeryDigestive System Surgical ProceduresHumansItalySocieties, MedicalAnastomotic leakageColorectal surgeryConsensusDefinitionDelphiManagement

Identifiers

PMID32613380
OpenAlexW3039359621

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.