Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35915290›Full record

SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2022

Role of transanal drainage tubes in preventing anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

S Zhao, K Hu, Y Tian, Y Xu, W Tong

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

S Zhao *Gastric and Colorectal Surgery Division, Department of General Surgery, Army Medical Center (Daping Hospital), Army Medical University, No. 10, Changjiangzhilu, Daping, Yuzhong District,, Chongqing, 400042, China.
K Hu *Gastric and Colorectal Surgery Division, Department of General Surgery, Army Medical Center (Daping Hospital), Army Medical University, No. 10, Changjiangzhilu, Daping, Yuzhong District,, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Y TianGastric and Colorectal Surgery Division, Department of General Surgery, Army Medical Center (Daping Hospital), Army Medical University, No. 10, Changjiangzhilu, Daping, Yuzhong District,, Chongqing, 400042, China.
Y XuGastric and Colorectal Surgery Division, Department of General Surgery, Army Medical Center (Daping Hospital), Army Medical University, No. 10, Changjiangzhilu, Daping, Yuzhong District,, Chongqing, 400042, China.
W TongGastric and Colorectal Surgery Division, Department of General Surgery, Army Medical Center (Daping Hospital), Army Medical University, No. 10, Changjiangzhilu, Daping, Yuzhong District,, Chongqing, 400042, China. vdtong@163.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6150-9941
Army Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe transanal drainage tube (TDT) is thought to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients with low anterior resection (LAR). However, results from different clinical trials are inconsistent, although nearly all meta-analyses agree on the efficacy. In contrast to results of many previous studies, 2 recent independent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest that the use of TDT does not prevent AL. We performed a meta-analysis including only RCTs to compare patients with TDTs vs. those without TDTs in terms of AL rate.

methodsA systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO/ICTRP from inception until February 14, 2022. RCTs that evaluated the role of TDTs in AL prevention in patients who underwent LAR for rectal cancer were included. A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were extracted by two authors independently, and random-effects models were implemented. The main outcome was AL, and the secondary outcome was the grade of AL.

resultsThree RCTs were included involving a total of 1115 participants (559 patients in the TDT group and 556 in the non-TDT group). No significant difference in the AL rate was detected (RR = 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-1.15, p = 0.15, I

conclusionsThe present meta-analysis suggests that TDTs are not effective in reducing the overall incidence of AL, but possibly have a potential benefit in reducing the occurrence of grade C AL in patients with LAR. Based on the current limited data and existing heterogeneity, the inclusion of larger populations and the identification of more uniform indications for TDT need to be addressed in future studies.

Indexed as

ProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsAnastomotic LeakDrainageHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnastomotic leakageLow anterior resectionMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialTransanal drainage tube

Identifiers

PMID35915290
OpenAlexW4289261549

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.