Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37196997›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer & allied specialties2023

Large Bowel Perforation in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A South African Perspective.

Jocelynn Norman, Yoshan Moodley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer & allied specialties, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Jocelynn NormanGastrointestinal Cancer Research Group, Department of Surgery, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Yoshan MoodleyGastrointestinal Cancer Research Group, Department of Surgery, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Large bowel perforation (LBP) occurs in up to 10% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and is a potential surgical emergency. Data on LBP in CRC patients from resource-limited countries are required to improve the management of this condition in these settings. Our study aimed to describe LBP amongst CRC patients in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Materials and Methods: This was a descriptive sub-analysis of LBP data from an ongoing CRC registry. This study explores free and contained perforations and describes LBP characteristics, surgical management, histological findings, overall survival, and CRC recurrence. Results: Ninety-four out of 2523 CRC patients had LBP (3.7%). The median age was 53.0 years (interquartile range: 43.0-64.0). The male-to-female ratio was 1.4:1. Thirty-three patients (35.1%) had a coexisting bowel obstruction. Tumor site perforations occurred in 87 patients (92.6%) and were mostly in the sigmoid colon (36.2%). Perforations were contained in 77 patients (81.9%). Eighty-nine patients (94.7%) underwent resection (elective resection: 76/89 patients, 85.4%). The post-operative inpatient mortality rate was 2.2%. Most patients had Stage III CRC (46 patients, 48.9%) and moderately differentiated tumors (77 patients, 81.9%). Overall survival at 12 months following CRC diagnosis was 55.4%. The early recurrence rate for CRC disease was 5.4%. Conclusion: Tumor site perforations predominated, and most were contained. Patients were younger when compared with the international literature. We reaffirm that diastatic-free and contained perforations are two distinct clinical entities.

Indexed as

Colorectal neoplasmsintestinal perforationlarge intestineSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID37196997
PMCPMC10187599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.