Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37561203›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2023

Impact of powered circular stapler on anastomotic leak after anastomosis to the rectum: a propensity score matched study.

Andrea Vignali, Lorenzo Gozzini, Giulia Gasparini, Riccardo Calef, Riccardo Rosati, Ugo Elmore

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Circular stapler platform and the risk of anastomotic leakage after elective left colectomy and high anterior resection.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors.

Andrea VignaliDepartment of Coloproctology and Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Vita e Salute University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy. vignali.andrea@hsr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7887-4088
Lorenzo GozziniDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita e salute University, Milan, Italy.
Giulia GaspariniDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita e salute University, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo CalefDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita e salute University, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo RosatiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita e salute University, Milan, Italy.
Ugo ElmoreDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita e salute University, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of the present study is to assess the impact of Echelon Circular

methodsA single center cohort study was carried out on 552 consecutive patients, who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection and anastomosis to the rectum between December 2017 and September 2022. Patients who underwent powered circular anastomosis to the rectum were matched to those who had a conventional stapled anastomosis using a propensity score matching. Main outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) rate, anastomotic bleeding, and postoperative outcomes.

resultsAfter adjusting cases with propensity score matching, two new groups of patients were generated: 145 patients in the PCS and 145 in the CCS. The two groups were homogeneous with respect to demographics and comorbidities on admission. Overall, AL occurred in 21 (7.3%) patients. No significant differences were observed with respect to AL (5.5% in PCS vs 9% in CCS; p = 0.66), fistula severity (p = 0.60) or reoperation rate (p = 0.65) in the two groups in study. A higher rate of anastomotic bleeding was observed in the CCS vs PCS (5.5% vs 0.7%, p = 0.03). At univariate analysis performed after propensity score matching, stapler diameter ≥ 31mm and age ≥ 70 years were the only variable significantly associated with anastomotic leak (p = 0.001 and p = 0.031; respectively).

conclusionsThe powered circular stapler has no impact on AL, while it could affect bleeding rate at the anastomotic site.

Indexed as

Anastomotic LeakColorectal NeoplasmsAgedAnastomosis, SurgicalCohort StudiesHumansPropensity ScoreRectumRetrospective StudiesSurgical StaplersSurgical StaplingAnastomotic bleeding postoperative complicationsAnastomotic leakColorectal cancerPowered circular stapler

Identifiers

PMID37561203

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.