ArticleBJS open2022
Differences in the management of patients requiring an emergency resection for colonic cancer in two European populations.
Article in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Oncologic Surgical Emergencies: A Retrospective Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Management of obstructed colorectal carcinoma in an emergency setting: An update.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Review
- Trends of colorectal cancer surgery in 2022.BJS open · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with colonic cancer who require emergency colonic cancer surgery often experience poorer outcomes compared with their elective counterparts. In this setting, several treatments approaches are available. In 2009, Danish guidelines recommended treatment with stent for obstruction in left-sided tumours as a bridge to surgery, if expertise is accessible. The aim of this study was to compare the use of elective and emergency resections for colonic cancer and postoperative mortality in two similar demographic populations.
methodsAll patients who underwent a major resection for colonic cancer, between 2005 and 2016 in Denmark and Yorkshire (UK) were identified. The proportion undergoing emergency surgery, the proportion receiving a stent procedure before their resection, and 30-day postoperative mortality were compared between the populations. Logistic regression was used to determine changes in the proportion of those undergoing emergency surgery and 30-day postoperative mortality.
resultsOut of 45 397 patients treated during the study interval, 41 880 were selected. Emergency surgery decreased in Denmark from 16.6 per cent in 2005-07 to 12.9 per cent in 2014-16, but increased in Yorkshire (13.5 per cent to 16.8 per cent). Danish patients with left-sided tumours were less likely to undergo emergency surgery (risk ratio 0.90, 95 per cent c.i. 0.82 to 0.99) and an increase in stent use coincided with a statistically significant decrease in emergency surgery in these patients. Thirty-day postoperative mortality in all resections (elective and emergency) decreased in both populations, but a larger decrease was observed in Denmark (7.7 per cent to 3.0 per cent in Denmark and 7.1 per cent to 3.3 per cent in Yorkshire).
conclusionPatients in Denmark experienced a reduction in the use of emergency resection and increase in stenting procedures, following the policy implemented in some departments of converting potential emergency resections into elective resections.
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.