Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38021792›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Single-Layer or Double-Layer Intestinal Anastomosis: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Donatus K Okafor, Gitika Katyal, Gursharan Kaur, Hafsa Ashraf, Adi Prasad Bodapati, Ayesha Hanif, Safeera Khan

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Donatus K OkaforResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Gitika KatyalResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Gursharan KaurResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Hafsa AshrafResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Adi Prasad BodapatiResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Ayesha HanifResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
Safeera KhanResearch, California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology, Fairfield, USA.
California Institute of Behavioral Neurosciences and Psychology (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several malignant and benign indications may necessitate bowel resection. Despite the emergence of newer techniques, the hand-sewn technique remains popular for the reestablishment of intestinal continuity after resection. This method can achieve anastomosis in one or two layers. Some studies have suggested that the single-layer technique has several potential benefits compared to its rivals while simultaneously maintaining a comparable efficacy and safety profile. Previous reviews have failed to recommend either of these methods over the other due to a lack of high-quality evidence. This review aims to establish which technique provides the best outcomes by reviewing recent relevant trials and comparing both methods. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. A database search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) ultimately returned nine randomized trials published between 2003 and 2023 comparing single-layer intestinal anastomosis (SLIA) and double-layer intestinal anastomosis (DLIA) that fit the inclusion criteria. Overall, results show a dearth of robust trials, and the included studies displayed variable eligibility criteria and materials used for anastomosis. The available evidence, however, does suggest that neither technique is inferior in terms of preventing post-operative complications, but SLIA is less expensive and quicker to perform. The evidence is, however, limited, and further high-quality research is needed.

Indexed as

anastomotic leakbowel anastomosiscolorectal anastomosisdouble-layerintestinal anastomosis“post-operative complications”single-layer

Identifiers

PMID38021792
PMCPMC10631554
OpenAlexW4387457636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.