Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33098498›Full record

SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2021

A systematic review of the literature assessing the outcomes of stapled haemorrhoidopexy versus open haemorrhoidectomy.

Q Z Ruan, W English, A Hotouras, C Bryant, F Taylor, S Andreani, S D Wexner, S Banerjee

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Q Z RuanWhipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
W EnglishWhipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
A HotourasWhipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK. alex007@doctors.org.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0593-7041
C BryantWhipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
F TaylorWhipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
S AndreaniWhipps Cross University Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
S D WexnerCleveland Clinic Florida, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.
S BanerjeeBarking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Romford, UK.
Barts Health NHS Trust · GBBarking, Havering And Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBCleveland Clinic Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSymptomatic haemorrhoids affect a large number of patients throughout the world. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the surgical outcomes of stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) versus open haemorrhoidectomy (OH) over a 20-year period.

methodsRandomized controlled trials published between January 1998 and January 2019 were extracted from Pubmed using defined search criteria. Study characteristics and outcomes in the form of short-term and long-term complications of the two techniques were analyzed. Any changes in trend of outcomes over time were assessed by comparing article groups 1998-2008 and 2009-2019.

resultsTwenty-nine and 9 relevant articles were extracted for the 1998-2008 (period 1) and 2009-2019 (period 2) cohorts, respectively. Over the two time periods, SH was found to be a safe procedure, associated with statistically reduced operative time (in 13/21 studies during period 1 and in 3/8 studies during period 2), statistically less intraoperative bleeding (3/7 studies in period 1 and 1/1 study in period 2) and consistently less early postoperative pain on the visual analogue scale (12/15 studies in period 1 and 4/5 studies in period 2) resulting in shorter hospital stay (12/20 studies in period 1 and 2/2 studies in period 2) at the expense of a higher cost. In the longer term, although chronic pain in SH and OH patents is comparable, patient satisfaction with SH may decline with time and at 2-year follow-up OH appeared to be associated with greater patient satisfaction.

conclusionsSH appears to be safe with potential advantages, at least in the short term, but the evidence is lacking at the moment to suggest its routine use in clinical practice.

Indexed as

HemorrhoidectomyHemorrhoidsHumansLength of StayPostoperative PainSurgical StaplingHaemorrhoidectomyOpenOutcomesStapled

Identifiers

PMID33098498
PMCPMC7847454
OpenAlexW3094364990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.