Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35046183›Full record

ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery

Side-to-side versus end-to-side ileocolic anastomosis in right-sided colectomies: A cohort control study.

Snow Yunni Lin, Bryan Jun Liang Buan, Wilson Sim, Sneha Rajiv Jain, Heidi Sian Ying Chang, Kuok Chung Lee, Choon Seng Chong

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Stapled End-To-Side Ileocolic Anastomosis in Crohn's Disease: Old Dog, Reliable Tricks? A Retrospective Two-Center Cohort Study.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Snow Yunni LinYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Bryan Jun Liang BuanDepartment of Surgery, Division of Colorectal Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Wilson SimYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Sneha Rajiv JainYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Heidi Sian Ying ChangDepartment of Surgery, Division of Colorectal Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Kuok Chung LeeDepartment of Surgery, Division of Colorectal Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Choon Seng ChongYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore; Department of Surgery, Division of Colorectal Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.
National University Hospital · SGNational University of Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: The three main types of anastomotic configurations following colorectal resection are Side-to-Side Anastomosis (S-S), End-to-Side Anastomosis (E-S) and End-to-End Anastomosis (E-E). This study aims to present results from a local cohort supplemented by a systematic review with meta-analysis of existing literature to compare the post-operative outcomes between E-S and S-S. Methods: A cohort study of patients who underwent right colectomy with E-S or S-S anastomosis, was conducted at the National University Hospital Singapore. Electronic databases Embase and Medline were systematically searched from inception to 21 August 2020, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. Studies were included if they compared post-operative outcomes between E-S and S-S. Results: In the cohort study, 40 underwent E-S and 154 underwent S-S. Both post-operative ileus (12.5% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.041) and length of hospital stay (9.35 days vs. 14.04 days, P = 0.024) favoured E-S, but anastomotic bleed favoured S-S (15.0% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.004). Five studies were included in the meta-analysis with 860 E-S and 1126 S-S patients. Similarly, post-operative ileus (odds ratio [OR] =0.302; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.122-0.747; P = 0.010) and length of hospital stay (mean differences = ‒1.54 days; CI: ‒3.00 to ‒0.076 days; P = 0.039) favoured E-S. Additional sensitivity analysis including only stapled anastomosis showed a lower rate of anastomotic leak in E-S patients (OR = 0.185; 95% CI: 0.054-0.627; P = 0.007). Conclusions: This is the first systematic review to show that the E-S technique produces superior post-operative outcomes after right colectomy compared to S-S. However, the choice of anastomosis was largely surgeon dependent, but surgeon factors were not reported.

Indexed as

Anastomosiscolectomyend-to-sideside-to-side

Identifiers

PMID35046183
PMCPMC9306133
OpenAlexW4206483363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.