ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2021
Critical surgical errors by junior fellows and trainees in low rectal cancer surgery: How to overcome?(A cross-sectional study).
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Top Twenty-Five Most Influential Articles in Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.HCA healthcare journal of medicine · 2025Review
- Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTechnical difficulties are usually reported in low rectal cancer (LRC) surgery. Moreover inadvertent surgical errors could happen mostly due to lack of experience of the assisting surgeons. Unfortunately, these errors may end up with raising a permanent stoma. In this study we are reporting seven inadvertent surgical mishaps during surgeries for LRC which resulted in failure of the planned circular end to end anastomosis and how we approached them by different salvage techniques. PATIENTS AND
methodsAll surgical mistakes were salvaged by two of our senior consultants with intraoperative decision to shift to another approach to attain intestinal continuity. Two patients had direct handswen coloanal anastomosis, three received colon pull through and two with redo stapled circular end to end anastomosis after shifting to the anterior perineal plane. Postoperative assessment of the functional state using wexner score was done for all cases.
resultsAll surgical mistakes had been overcomed after shifting to the transanal and/or perineal approach and we were able to regain intestinal continuity in all cases Circumferential and distal margins were free in all specimens. Two patients showed optimal continence with wexner score 3,5 respectively, Two had suboptimal continence Wexner 6,7. Female patient with iatrogenic rectovaginal fistula suffered from poor quality of life and asked for permanent stoma.
conclusionAll trainees and junior fellows in should receive a clearly defined training program and focused education with different staplers; additionally they should work under supervision of the senior consultants who should be sufficiently experienced with different salvage approaches.
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.