Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33915760›Full record

ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2021

Colonic Stenting in the Emergency Setting.

Mario Morino, Alberto Arezzo, Francesca Farnesi, Edoardo Forcignanò

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mario MorinoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino corso Dogliotti 14, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Alberto ArezzoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino corso Dogliotti 14, 10126 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2110-4082
Francesca FarnesiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino corso Dogliotti 14, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Edoardo ForcignanòDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino corso Dogliotti 14, 10126 Torino, Italy.
University of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nowadays, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent cancer, and about a third of patients with CRC presents themselves with symptoms of large bowel obstruction. Historically, surgical resection was the treatment of choice for colonic obstruction, but this kind of approach is burdened by a high risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality. In recent times, the use of a colonic stent has been proposed to overcome the obstruction and transform an emergency surgical case into an elective one to avoid emergency surgery complications. Endoscopic stenting is the first-line treatment option in the palliative management of colonic obstruction, and there is sufficient scientific evidence to support this approach. However, endoscopic stent used as a bridge to surgery is not yet widely adopted because the concern was raised about the long-term survival and cancer safety of this approach. The recent scientific evidence has shown that this approach improves the short-term outcomes, such as postoperative complications and the stoma rate, without differences in long-term outcomes compared to emergency surgery. Therefore, the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in 2020 has reconsidered stenting as a bridge to surgery as a valid alternative to emergency surgery.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsIntestinal ObstructionEmergenciesHumansStentsTreatment Outcomecolonic obstructioncolonic stentcolorectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID33915760
PMCPMC8067149
OpenAlexW3139888287

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.