ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2023
Surgical management of rectal foreign bodies: A single-center experience.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRectal foreign bodies (RFBs) are one of the rare clinical presentations in colorectal surgical practice, with an increasing incidence over the recent years. Due to the lack of standardized treatment options, the management of RFBs can be chal-lenging. This study aimed to evaluate our diagnostic and therapeutic approach to RFBs and to suggest a management algorithm.
methodsAll patients with RFBs who hospitalized between January 2010 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, RFB insertion mechanism, inserted objects, diagnostic findings, management, complications, and outcomes were all evaluated. An algorithm for clinical management was developed depending on the center's experience.
resultsThe cohort consisted of 21 patients, 17 (81%) were males. The median age was 33 years (ranging, 19-71). Sexual prefer-ences were the reason for RFB in 15 (71.4%) patients. In 17 (81%) patients, the RFB size over 10 cm. In 4 (19%) patients, RFBs were removed transanally without anesthesia in the emergency department; in the remaining 17 (81%), they were removed under anesthesia. Among these, RFBs were removed transanally under general anesthesia in 2 (9.5%) patients; with the assistance of a colonoscope under anesthesia in 8 (38%) patients; by milking towards the transanal route during laparotomy in 3 (14.2%) patients; and with the Hartmann procedure without restoration of bowel continuity in 4 (19%) patients. The median hospital stay was 6 days (ranging, 1-34 days). The Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complication rate was 9.5%, and no post-operative mortality was observed.
conclusionRFBs can usually be successfully removed transanally in the operating room with appropriate anesthetic technique and proper surgical instrument selection.
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.