SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Clinical efficacy of anastomotic reinforcement suture in preventing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive evaluation of reinforcement strategies for anastomotic leak prevention in rectal cancer surgery: an umbrella review of meta-analyses.Updates in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of laparoscopic intracorporeal reinforcing sutures to prevent anastomotic leakage: A meta-analysis.Saudi medical journal · 2025Pooled it
- Prevention and management of anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection: evolving trends among Italian surgeons. A SICCR survey.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Lateral reinforcement of anastomoses enhances mechanical strength in fragile neonatal oesophageal tissue.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Integrated intraoperative strategies to prevent anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection: The roles of left colic artery preservation, reinforcement suturing, and transanal tube placement.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy of reinforced suturing, transanal drainage tube, and no additional intervention in preventing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a network meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Article
- The application of intraoperative strategies to reduce protective stoma in mid and low rectal cancer: a retrospective study utilizing indocyanine green and precise anatomical techniques.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Improved outcomes with cyanoacrylate glue for ileocolic anastomosis in right colectomy: a multicenter study.Annals of coloproctology · 2025Article
- Clinical application of "purse-string suture" under endoscope in the treatment of refractory postoperative intestinal anastomotic fistula.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- [Anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnastomotic leakage (AL) is a common postoperative complication of rectal cancer, with an incidence of about 10%, and the efficacy of reinforced sutures for preventing AL remains contentious. This study investigated the safety and effectiveness of reinforcement sutures for preventing AL after rectal cancer surgery.
methodsThe present authors conducted a systematic search in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Sinomed, Web of Science, Wanfang, VIP, and CNKI databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies up to June 2023. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of anastomotic reinforcement sutures after rectal cancer surgery. The primary outcome measures were AL, anastomotic bleeding, and infection rates.
resultsEleven articles (1921 subjects) were analyzed, with 912 and 1009 cases in the reinforced and unreinforced suture groups, respectively. The reinforced suture group showed a lower AL incidence (odds ratio [OR]=0.25, 95% CI 0.17-0.37, P< 0.00001), lower infection rate (OR=0.41, 95%CI 0.19-0.89, P<0.05), shorter hospital stay (mean difference [MD]=-0.57, 95%CI -1.15-0.00, P≤0.05), and earlier anal exhaust (MD=-0.12, 95%CI -0.23-0.00, P<0.05). However, the operative time (MD=18.25, 95% CI 12.20-24.30, P<0.00001) was longer for reinforced sutures than for unreinforced sutures. There were no significant differences between the suture techniques in intraoperative blood loss MD=2.74, 95% CI -4.50-9.97, P>0.05), incidence of anastomotic bleeding (OR=0.49, 95%CI 0.12-1.97, P>0.05), and incidence of intestinal obstruction (OR=0.65, 95%CI 0.27-1.61, P>0.05).
conclusionExisting articles indicate that anastomotic reinforcement sutures can significantly reduce AL incidence. However, this conclusion still requires confirmation based on multicentre, high-quality RCTs with large sample sizes.
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.