ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2022
Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: a single-center comparative study.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of technical approaches and clinical outcomes.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Incidence and Long-Term Outcomes of Pouchitis in Ulcerative Colitis Patients.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of single and double stapling anastomosis in restorative surgery for ulcerative colitis: short- and long-term outcomes and functional results.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Outcomes after transanal proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in adolescents.Pediatric surgery international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIleal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the procedure of choice in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) requiring surgery. Advantages of laparoscopic IPAA (lap-IPAA) compared to open surgery have been investigated. However, laparoscopic dissection in the pelvis is still a challenge. A transanal approach provides better access to lower pelvis and avoids multiple staple firings, which could reduce the risk of anastomotic complications. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of transanal proctectomy with IPAA (ta-IPAA) with conventional lap-IPAA in patients with UC.
methodsA single-center retrospective study was conducted on consecutive UC patients, treated at Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, undergoing either laparoscopic or transanal IPAA in the period between January 2013 and December 2020. Exclusion criteria were Crohn's disease, previous extensive abdominal surgery and impaired sphincter function. Primary outcomes were overall postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and re-admissions. For comparison between ta-IPAA and lap-IPAA, the Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous variables, and Chi-square and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables.
resultsA total of 65 patients with ta-IPAA (34 males, 31 females, median age 31 years [range 12-66 years]) and 70 patients with lap-IPAA (35 males, 35 females, median age 26 years [range 12-66 years]) were included. There was no difference between ta-IPAA and lap-IPAA regarding age, sex, body mass index or American Society of Anesthesiologists class. The primary colectomy procedure was performed laparoscopically in 95% of the ta-IPPA and 91% of the lap-IPAA patients (p = 0.493). The mean time between total colectomy and IPAA was 15 and 9 weeks for ta-IPAA and lap-IPAA, respectively (p = 0.048). A higher proportion of patients with ta-IPAA were treated with biologics preoperatively (98 vs. 82%; p = 0.002). Patients with ta-IPAA had a significantly higher mean operative time compared to lap-IPAA (277 min vs. 224 min; p = 0.001). There was no difference in the overall postoperative complication rate (ta-IPAA: 23% vs. lap-IPAA: 23%; p = 0.99). Pouch-related complications occurred in 13% of the ta-IPAA patients and 29% of lap-IPPA patients (p = 0.402). There was no difference in the anastomotic leakage rates. Readmission rates were similar in the ta-IPAA and lap-IPAA group (26 vs. 29%; p = 0.85), including IPAA-related readmissions. The mean follow-up time was 24 and 75 months for ta-IPAA and lap-IPAA, respectively (p = 0.001), and the ileostomy closure rate was similar in both groups of patients (p = 0.96).
conclusionsThe ta-IPAA approach for UC is a safe procedure and offers acceptable short-time outcomes.
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.