Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36526812›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2023

Small bowel anastomosis in peritonitis compared to enterostomy formation: a systematic review.

Anders Peter Skovsen, Jakob Burcharth, Ismail Gögenur, Mai-Britt Tolstrup

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anders Peter SkovsenSurgical Department, Hillerød Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hillerød, Denmark. skovsen@dadlnet.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5782-8173
Jakob BurcharthSurgical Department, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8367-7831
Ismail GögenurSurgical Department, Zealand University Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Køge, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3753-268X
Mai-Britt TolstrupSurgical Department, Hillerød Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hillerød, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7828-2229
University of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAnastomotic leakage after small bowel resection in emergency laparotomy is a severe complication. A consensus on the risk factors for anastomotic leakage has not been established, and it is still unclear if peritonitis is a risk factor. This systematic review aimed to evaluate if an entero-entero/entero-colonic anastomosis is safe in patients with peritonitis undergoing abdominal acute care surgery.

methodsA systematic literature review based on PRISMA guidelines was performed, searching the databases Pubmed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct for studies of anastomosis in peritonitis. Patients with an anastomosis after non-planned small bowel resection (ischemia, perforation, or strangulation), including secondary peritonitis, were included. Elective laparotomies and colo-colonic anastomoses were excluded. Due to the etiology, traumatic perforation, in-vitro, and animal studies were excluded.

resultsThis review identified 26 studies of small-bowel anastomosis in peritonitis with a total of 2807 patients. This population included a total of 889 small-bowel/right colonic resections with anastomoses, and 242 enterostomies. All studies, except two, were retrospective reviews or case series. The overall mortality rates were 0-20% and anastomotic leakage rates 0-36%. After performing a risk of bias evaluation there was no basis for conducting a meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was rated as low.

conclusionThere was no evidence to refute performing a primary small-bowel anastomosis in acute laparotomy with peritonitis. There is currently insufficient evidence to label peritonitis as a risk factor for anastomotic leakage in acute care laparotomy with small-bowel resection.

trial registrationThe review was registered with the PROSPERO register of systematic reviews on 14/07/2020 with the ID: CRD42020168670.

Indexed as

EnterostomyPeritonitisAnastomosis, SurgicalAnastomotic LeakAnimalsHumansRetrospective StudiesAcute care surgeryAnastomosisAnastomotic leakageEmergency surgeryLaparotomyPeritonitis

Identifiers

PMID36526812
OpenAlexW4311825191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.