SynthesisPloS one2023
Enhancing intestinal anastomotic healing using butyrate: Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental animal studies.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective randomized controlled pilot study of gut microbiome modulation by Nigella sativa seed oil and thymoquinone metabolism in healthy volunteers: implications for gastrointestinal surgery.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- From Microbiota Correction to Host Protection: A New Therapeutic Target for the Prevention and Treatment of Postoperative Complications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Perioperative faecal microbiome dynamics in patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in the IMARI-trial.BJS open · 2026Article
- Post-Surgical Gut Microbiota Alterations in Pediatric Patients with Intestinal Disorders.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The gut microbiome in colorectal anastomotic leakage: from mechanisms to precision.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite advancements in surgical technique and perioperative care, intestinal anastomoses still have a 10-15 per cent risk of leakage, which results in considerable morbidity and/or mortality. Recent animal studies have suggested that administration of butyrate to the anastomotic site results in enhanced anastomotic strength, which may prevent leakage. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarises current evidence concerning the effect of butyrate administration on anastomotic healing and will form a scientific basis for the development of new research into this subject.
methodsAnimal studies on the effect of butyrate-based interventions in models of intestinal anastomotic healing were systematically retrieved from online databases. Bibliographical data, study characteristics and outcome data were extracted, and internal validity of the studies was assessed. Outcomes studied through meta-analysis concerned: anastomotic strength, anastomotic leakage, collagen metabolism and general histologic parameters of wound healing.
resultsA comprehensive search and selection identified 19 relevant studies containing 41 individual comparisons. Design and conduct of most experiments were poorly reported resulting in an unclear risk of bias. Meta-analyses showed that butyrate administration significantly increases anastomotic strength (SMD 1.24, 0.88 to 1.61), collagen synthesis (SMD 1.44, 0.72 to 2.15) and collagen maturation, making anastomoses less prone to leakage in the early postoperative period (OR 0.37, 0.15 to 0.93).
conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis shows that there is potential ground to investigate the use of butyrate in clinical trials to prevent anastomotic leakage in intestinal surgery. However, more research is necessary to define the best application form, dosage and administration route.
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.