Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33515307›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2021

Does rectal tube/transanal stent placement after an anterior resection for rectal cancer reduce anastomotic leak? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kay T Choy, Tze Wei Wilson Yang, Alexander Heriot, Satish K Warrier, Joseph C Kong

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Dehiscence of colorectal anastomosis treated with noninvasive procedures.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Endoscopy in surgery.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kay T Choy *Department of Surgery, Austin Hospital, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC, 3084, Australia. kay.choy@uqconnect.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5763-5742
Tze Wei Wilson Yang *Department of Colorectal Surgery, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Alexander HeriotDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Satish K WarrierDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Joseph C KongDivision of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUAustin Hospital · AUThe Alfred Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing evidence that either a transanal stent (TAS) or rectal tube (RT) can decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage (AL) after anterior resection for rectal cancer, in which a diverting stoma may not be required.

objectivesThe aim of this review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of RT/TAS in preventing AL after anterior resections. DATA SOURCES: An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000 and 2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases. STUDY SELECTION: All studies reporting on anterior resections in adults, comparing transanal tube/stent versus non-tube/stent, were analysed.

main outcome measureThe primary outcome was rates of AL, whereas secondary outcomes compared associated unplanned re-operation for AL and hospital length of stay (LOS).

resultsTwo randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies were included, with 1714 patients receiving RT/TAS and 1741 patients without. There were 119 (7%) patients with AL in the RT/TAS group compared to 216 (12.3%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.38-0.62, p < 0.001). There were 47 (2.9%) patients with AL complications requiring surgery in the RT/TAS group compared to 132 (8%) patients in the non-RT/TAS group (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.42, p < 0.001) and no significant difference identified with the standardized mean difference (SMD) favouring the RT/TAS group for hospital LOS (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.51 to 0.06, p = 0.115).

conclusionThe use of RT/TAS post restorative anterior resection for rectal cancer should be considered, given the benefits shown from this meta-analysis.

Indexed as

Digestive System Surgical ProceduresRectal NeoplasmsAdultAnastomosis, SurgicalAnastomotic LeakHumansStentsAnastomotic leakAnterior resectionDecompressionRectal tube

Identifiers

PMID33515307
OpenAlexW3124103762

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.