ArticleJournal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons
Is an Antireflux Procedure Necessary for a Successful Appendicostomy? The Simplified Malone Antegrade Continence Enema Procedure.
Article in Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study was to present the long-term institutional experience and outcomes of our Malone antegrade continence enema (MACE) procedure using the proximal appendix without any antireflux procedure. Materials and Methods: A single-center prospective study of 29 children undergoing a simplified Malone antegrade continence enema (SMACE) procedure from 2006 to 2017 was conducted using the appendix, whole or split. The mean follow-up period was 11.5 years (ranging from 5 to 16 years). Results: In 25 children, the proximal appendix was used, and in 4 cases, the whole appendix was used as a conduit. On follow-up, the MACE channel has been working well in 29/29 patients. Among the complications, seven patients had stomal stenosis, which was managed by home dilatation. There was no reflux of stools seen in any of the patients. Conclusion: The SMACE procedure, without incorporating an antireflux mechanism, is technically simpler and saves operative time. Most importantly, the results are satisfactory and comparable with procedures using antireflux techniques.
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.