SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2022
Different segmental resection techniques and postoperative complications in patients with colorectal endometriosis: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different segmental resection techniques and postoperative complications in patients with colorectal endometriosis: A systematic review.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Pooled it
- Mesentery-Preserving Hand-Sewn Anastomosis for Rectal Endometriosis: A Nerve-Sparing Laparoscopic Technique.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Postoperative and long-term outcomes of nerve-sparing segmental rectal resection and complete nodular resection of rectal endometriosis.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2026Article
- Building Disease Models for Endometriosis: iPSCs as Game-Changers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Gastrointestinal function and pain outcomes following segmental resection or discoid resection for low rectal endometriosis.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2025Article
- Long-term gastrointestinal function outcomes of women undergoing nerve-vessel sparing segmental or full-thickness discoid resection for deep colorectal endometriosis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Predicting the risk of endometriosis in Chinese infertile women: development and assessment of a predictive nomogram.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Pain, gastrointestinal function and fertility outcomes of modified nerve-vessel sparing segmental and full thickness discoid resection for deep colorectal endometriosis - A prospective cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023Article
- Gynecological Fistulae-Has Anything Changed in the Diagnosis and Treatment over the Last Decade? A Narrative Literature Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to analyze the available literature by conducting a systematic review to assess the possible effects of nerve-sparing segmental resection and conventional bowel resection on postoperative complications for the treatment of colorectal endometriosis. MATERIAL AND
methodsPubmed, Clinical Trials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched from 1997 to 2021 in order to perform a systematic review. Studies including patients undergoing segmental resection for colorectal endometriosis including adequate follow-up, data on postoperative complications and postoperative sequelae were enrolled in this review. Selected articles were evaluated and divided in two groups: Nerve-sparing resection (NSR), and conventional segmental resection not otherwise specified (SRNOS). Within the NSRs, studies mentioning preservation of the rectal artery supply (artery and nerve-sparing SR - ANSR) and not reporting preservation of the artery supply (NSR not otherwise specified - NSRNOS) were further analyzed. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021250974.
resultsA total of 7549 patients from 63 studies were included in the data analysis. Forty-three of these publications did not mention the preservation or the removal of the hypogastric nerve plexus, or main rectal artery supply and were summarized as SRNOS. The remaining 22 studies were listed under the NSR group. The mean size of the resected deep endometriosis lesions and patients' body mass index were comparable between SRNOS and NSR. A mean of 3.6% (0-16.6) and 2.3% (0-10.5%) of rectovaginal fistula development was reported in patients who underwent SRNOS and NSR, respectively. Anastomotic leakage rates varied from 0% to 8.6% (mean 1.7 ± 2%) in SRNOS compared with 0% to 8% (mean 1.7 ± 2%) in patients undergoing NSR. Urinary retention (4.5% and 4.9%) and long-term bladder catheterization (4.9% and 5.6%) were frequently reported in SRNOS and NSR. There was insufficient information about pain or the recurrence rates for women undergoing SRNOS and NSR.
conclusionsCurrent data describe the outcomes of different segmental resection techniques. However, the data are inhomogeneous and not sufficient to reach a conclusion regarding a possible advantage of one technique over the other.
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.