Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35091790›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2022

Feasibility and safety of transvaginal specimen extraction in deep endometriosis colorectal resectional surgery and analysis of risk factors for postoperative complications.

E Spagnolo, J Marí-Alexandre, S Di Saverio, J Gilabert-Estellés, C Agababyan, P Garcia-Casarrubios, A López, E González-Cantó, I Pascual, A Hernández

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

E Spagnolo *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "La Paz" University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
J Marí-Alexandre *Research Laboratory in Biomarkers in Reproduction, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Fundación Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
S Di SaverioGeneral Surgery One, University of Insubria, University Hospital of Varese, Viale Luigi Borri, 57, 21100, Varese, VA, Italy. salo75@inwind.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5685-5022
J Gilabert-EstellésResearch Laboratory in Biomarkers in Reproduction, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Fundación Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
C AgababyanResearch Laboratory in Biomarkers in Reproduction, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Fundación Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
P Garcia-CasarrubiosDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "La Paz" University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
A LópezDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "La Paz" University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
E González-CantóResearch Laboratory in Biomarkers in Reproduction, Gynecology and Obstetrics, Fundación Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
I PascualDepartment of General Surgery, "La Paz" University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
A HernándezDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "La Paz" University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Universitario La Paz · ESHospital General Universitario De Valencia · ESUniversitat de València · ESUniversity of Insubria · IT

Funding

Generalitat Valenciana APOST/2019/087Generalitat Valenciana GV/2020/200Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI17/01945Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI20/01368
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of the present study was to demonstrate that transvaginal specimen extraction is a feasible and safe approach in colorectal resection for deep endometriosis (DE) and to assess the risk factors for postoperative complications.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study included all the consecutive patients undergoing segmental bowel resection for symptomatic endometriosis at "La Paz" University Hospital (Madrid, Spain) and at "Hospital General Universitario de Valencia" (Valencia, Spain) from January 2014 to December to 2017. Patients were grouped according to specimen extraction approach into those who had transvaginal extraction (Group I) and those who had suprapubic extraction (Group II). Clinic-demographical, surgical and post-surgical data were recorded. Intra- and postoperative complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo criteria. Postoperative data were compared between groups. Risk factors associated with surgery were investigated.

resultsOut of 99 female patients included (average age 36.91 ± 5.36 years), 23 patients (23.2%) had transvaginal and 76 (76.8%) had suprapubic specimen extraction. The groups were comparable regarding operative time, nodule size, level of anastomosis, hospital stay and intraoperative complications. We observed no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications and rectovaginal fistula rate between the groups. Binary logistic regression analyses determined that vaginal endometriosis is an independent risk factor for postoperative complications (OR: 2.63, 95% CI [1.10-6.48], p = 0.03).

conclusionsTransvaginal specimen extraction is a safe and feasible technique in DE colorectal surgery and should be taken into consideration whenever vaginal endometriosis exists. Nevertheless, vaginal endometriosis can be an independent risk factor for postoperative complications in DE surgery.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsColorectal SurgeryEndometriosisLaparoscopyRectal DiseasesAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeColorectal endometriosisColorectal resectionColorectal surgeryDeep endometriosisNatural orifice specimen extractionPostoperative complications

Identifiers

PMID35091790
OpenAlexW4210628727

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.