Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36268752›Full record

ArticleBJS open2022

Use of sponge-assisted endoluminal vacuum therapy for the treatment of colorectal anastomotic leaks: expert panel consensus.

Willem A Bemelman, Alberto Arezzo, Tomasz Banasiewicz, Richard Brady, Eloy Espín-Basany, Omar Faiz, Rosa M Jimenez-Rodriguez

Open access · goldAbstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Willem A BemelmanDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alberto ArezzoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2110-4082
Tomasz BanasiewiczPoznan University of Medical Sciences, Department of General, Endocrinological Surgery and Gastroenterological Oncology, Poznań, Poland.
Richard BradyNewcastle Centre for Bowel Disease Research Group, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK.
Eloy Espín-BasanyUnit of Colorectal Surgery, Department of General and Digestive Surgery, University Hospital Vall d'Hebron-Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Omar FaizSt Mark's Hospital, London, UK.
Rosa M Jimenez-RodriguezUnidad de Coloproctología, Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8587-8768
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLHospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ESNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBPoznan University of Medical Sciences · PLSt Mark's Hospital · GBUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnastomotic leaks represent one of the most significant complications of colorectal surgery and are the primary cause of postoperative mortality and morbidity. Sponge-assisted endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) has emerged as a minimally invasive technique for the management of anastomotic leaks; however, there are questions regarding patient selection due to the heterogeneous nature of anastomotic leaks and the application of sponge-assisted EVT by surgeons.

methodSeven colorectal surgical experts participated in a modified nominal group technique to establish consensus regarding key questions that arose from existing gaps in scientific evidence and the variability in clinical practice. After a bibliographic search to identify the available evidence and sequential meetings with participants, a series of recommendations and statements were formulated and agreed upon.

resultsThirty-seven recommendations and statements on the optimal use of sponge-assisted EVT were elaborated on and unanimously agreed upon by the group of experts. The statements and recommendations answer 10 key questions about the indications, benefits, and definition of the success rate of sponge-assisted EVT for the management of anastomotic leaks.

conclusionAlthough further research is needed to resolve clinical and technical issues associated with sponge-assisted EVT, the recommendations and statements produced from this project summarize critical aspects to consider when using sponge-assisted EVT and to assist those involved in the management of patients with colorectal anastomotic leaks.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsNegative-Pressure Wound TherapyAnastomotic LeakHumansVacuum

Identifiers

PMID36268752
PMCPMC9585396
OpenAlexW4307034082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.