ArticleWorld journal of surgery2022
Short-Term Outcomes of Tri-Staple Versus Universal Staple in Laparoscopic Anterior Resection of Rectal and Distal Sigmoid Colonic Cancer: A Matched-Pair Analysis.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short- and Long-term Outcomes of 3-Row Vs 2-Row Circular Staplers for Low Colorectal Anastomosis After Total Mesorectal Excision: A Single-Center, Randomized, Single-Blind, Phase III Trial (THREESTAPLER Study).Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2026Trial
- Risk of anastomotic leakage with two-row versus three-row manual circular staplers in colorectal anastomosis: a U.S. cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnastomotic leakage is a serious complication in laparoscopic colorectal surgeries. To resolve this problem, a new stapling technology (Tri-staple) is developed. In this study, we aim to compare the short-term outcomes of Tri-staple versus Universal staple in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal and distal sigmoid colonic cancer.
methodsA total of 446 patients were admitted to our hospital and received laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal and distal sigmoid colonic cancer between January 2016 and December 2020. Among them, Tri-staples were used in 202 patients, and the Universal staples were used in 244 patients. Propensity score matching was performed, followed by a comparison between the two groups (Tri-staple vs. Universal staple) in the incidences of anastomotic leakage, bleeding, and reoperation.
resultsIn total, 270 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study by the propensity score matching, with each group having 135 patients. Tri-staple group had a significant lower incidence of anastomotic leakage compared with the Universal staple group (4.44% vs. 11.11%, P < 0.05). The reoperation rate was also lower in Tri-staple group than the Universal staple group (3.70% vs. 8.15%, P < 0.05). The anastomotic bleeding rates, average postoperative hospital stay, average drain indwelling period, and average fasting period had no statistical differences between the two groups.
conclusionThe usage of Tri-staple in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal and distal sigmoid colonic cancer is associated with lower postoperative complications compared with Universal staple. Future high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.
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.