ArticleCase reports in gastroenterology
Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy for Iatrogenic Rectal Perforation.
Article in Case reports in gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Summary of the current guidelines for managing iatrogenic colorectal perforations and the evolving role of endoluminal vacuum therapy.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- Endoluminal Vacuum Therapy (EVT) for the Treatment of Rectal Perforation Following Cleansing Enema Application.Cureus · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Serious iatrogenic bowel injuries during screening colonoscopy are rare events. If a perforation is detected during colonoscopy, endoscopic therapy can be attempted depending on the size and type as well as local endoscopic experience. We report the case of a 54-year-old female patient who was treated by endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) for a rectal perforation she had suffered during an outpatient screening colonoscopy. Two hours after the complication, an emergency endoscopy was performed. A perforation of the lower third of the rectum with a longitudinal diameter of 4 cm and a depth of 2.5 cm was detected. Due to the deep defect and the suspected increased risk of abscess formation after mechanical perforation closure with endoclips, we decided to perform EVT. The therapy was performed over a total period of 7 days. The patient was symptom free at all times. On the 2nd and 5th day, the endoscopic findings were re-evaluated and the inserted endosponges were changed. The sponge was adjusted to the wound conditions at each check and its length was gradually shortened. The endoscopic findings improved steadily. The EVT was completed after 7 days with the result of complete wound closure. The inflammatory parameters dropped continuously from day 1. On day 8, the patient could be discharged from inpatient treatment. No complications occurred in the post-inpatient course. This case is an example of successful EVT after iatrogenic rectal perforation. EVT should be considered for iatrogenic rectal perforation when signs of systemic inflammation are present and primary mechanical wound closure appears critical due to the depth of the defect and the presumed risk of abscess formation.
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.