Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34244951›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2021

Efficacy of Pelvic Peritoneum Closure After Laparoscopic Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Rectal Cancer.

Yu Shen, Tinghan Yang, Hanjiang Zeng, Wenjian Meng, Ziqiang Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Yu Shen *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guo Xue Xiang 37#, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Tinghan Yang *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guo Xue Xiang 37#, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Hanjiang ZengDepartment of Radiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Wenjian MengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guo Xue Xiang 37#, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China. mengwenjian@126.com.
Ziqiang WangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guo Xue Xiang 37#, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China. wangziqiang@scu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-2874-1535

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe descent of the small bowel into the pelvic dead space after extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) presents a higher risk for postoperative complications. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of pelvic peritoneum closure in preventing the small bowel from descending into the pelvic dead space and the potential consequences of this approach.

methodsPatients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic ELAPE from March 2014 to January 2019 were retrospectively investigated. Closure of the pelvic peritoneum (CPP) was routinely performed unless it was not feasible. All patients with pelvic peritoneum reconstruction were included in the CPP group, and patients without pelvic peritoneum reconstruction were included in the no-CPP group. The main outcomes included the incidences of the small bowel descending into the retro-urogenital space (space between the bladder/uterus and the sacrum on axial CT scans), perineal wound complications, perineal hernia, and small bowel obstruction (SBO).

resultsOf the 100 patients included, 79 received CPP, and 21 did not. Fewer patients with pelvic peritoneum closure had small bowels residing in the retro-urogenital space than patients without closure (17.7% vs 42.9%, p=0.014). The incidence of SBO was also lower in the CPP group (7.6% vs. 23.8%, p=0.034). Multivariable analysis showed that no-CPP (p=0.014) was an independent risk factor for the small bowel descending into the retro-urogenital space.

conclusionCPP may prevent the small bowel from descending into the retro-urogenital dead space in patients undergoing laparoscopic ELAPE without increasing the incidence of perineal wound complications. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm the efficacy of CPP in preventing SBO and perineal hernia.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsAbdomenFemaleHumansPerineumPeritoneumPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesExtralevator abdominoperineal excisionPerineal herniaPostoperative complicationRectal cancerSmall bowel obstruction

Identifiers

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.