Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32684743›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2020

Consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A modified Delphi study.

Claire Pm van Helsdingen, Audrey Chm Jongen, Wouter J de Jonge, Nicole D Bouvy, Joep Pm Derikx

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Standardization of international diverticular disease definitions.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Anastomotic Leak Following Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026
    Review
  17. Mesenteric excision and Kono-S anastomosis trial (MEErKAT): A study protocol for a multicentre, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised controlled, open-label superiority trial.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025
    Article
  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

5 authors.

Claire Pm van HelsdingenDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1105 AZ, Netherlands.
Audrey Chm JongenDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht 6202 AZ, Netherlands.
Wouter J de JongeTytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1105 BK, Netherlands.
Nicole D BouvyDepartment of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht 6202 AZ, Netherlands.
Joep Pm DerikxDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1105 AZ, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the emerging knowledge about colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) through the increasing number of clinical and experimental studies, there is no generally accepted definition of CAL. Because of the wide variety of definitions used in literature, comparison of study outcomes and quality of care is complicated.

aimTo reach consensus on the definition of CAL using a modified Delphi method.

methodsThe RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used. The expert panel consisted of international colorectal surgeons and researchers who had published three or more articles about CAL. The consensus process consisted of two online distributed questionnaires and a third round with a recommendation. In the questionnaires participants were asked to rate the appropriateness of statements using a 1-9 Likert scale. Consensus was defined as a panel median between 1-3 or 7-9 without disagreement. In the final round a recommendation was formed regarding the definition of CAL and the expert panel was asked if they agreed or disagreed.

resultsTwenty-three authors participated in the first round and twenty-one finished the second round. After two rounds consensus was reached on 37 items (80%) in nine different categories. The International Study Group of Rectal Cancer definition is the most frequently advised general definition by our panel. Consensus was reached regarding the clinical symptoms of CAL, which serum markers contributes to the suspicion of CAL, which radiological and perioperative findings should be considered as CAL, which grading system is appropriate and if there should be a range of postoperative days in the definition. Eventually, 19 experts completed all three rounds of which 16 (84%) agreed with our final recommendations for the definition of CAL.

conclusionA consensus-based recommendation for the definition of CAL was formed using our modified Delphi method that can be widely incorporated in the field.

Indexed as

Anastomotic LeakColorectal NeoplasmsDelphi TechniqueHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesAnastomotic leakColorectal anastomosisColorectal surgeryConsensusDefinitionMorbidityPostoperative complication

Identifiers

PMID32684743
PMCPMC7336323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.