Observational studyLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Does anastomotic leakage after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer influence long-term outcomes? A retrospective observational study.
Observational study 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography in laparoscopic sigmoid and rectal cancer surgery: no reduction in anastomotic leakage but a lower incidence of anastomotic strictures. A prospective single-center study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- A risk prediction model for overall and Grade C anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A nomogram of anastomotic stricture after rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether anastomotic leakage (AL) following intersphincteric resection (ISR) for ultralow rectal cancer (uLRC) is associated with long-term negative outcomes.
methodsBetween June 2011 and January 2022, 236 consecutive patients who underwent ISR with diverting ileostomy for uLRC were included. The primary outcome was long-term clinical consequences of AL, including chronic stricture, stoma reversal, and oncological and functional results.
resultsForty-one (17.4%) patients developed symptomatic AL, whereas only two (0.8%) required re-laparotomy due to severe leakage. Patients with leaks had a significantly increased incidence of chronic stricture (29.3% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.001) and stoma non-reversal (34.1% vs. 4.6%, P < 0.0001) than controls. The severe consequences were particularly common in patients with anastomotic separation, resulting in 60% of those presenting with chronic stricture and 50% ending up with stoma non-reversal. After a median follow-up of 59 (range, 7-139) months, AL did not compromise long-term oncological outcomes, including tumor recurrence (9.8% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.3), 5-year disease-free, and overall survival (73.4% vs. 74.8% and 85.1% vs. 85.4%, P = 0.56 and P = 0.55). A total of 149 patients with bowel continuity who completed self-assessment questionnaires were enrolled for functional evaluation. The median follow-up was 24 (range, 12-94) months after ileostomy reversal, and functional results were comparable between patients with and without leaks.
conclusionAL is an unfortunate reality for patients who underwent ISR for uLRC, but the rate of severe leakage is limited. Leaks contribute to possible adverse impacts on chronic stricture and stoma non-reversal, especially for patients with anastomotic separation. However, long-term oncological and functional results may not be compromised.
trial registrationChictr.org.cn identifier: ChiCTR-ONC-15007506 and ChiCTR2100051614.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37816844What 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.