Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38358053›Full record

SynthesisColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2024

Ostomy continence devices: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

Justin Dourado, Zoe Garoufalia, Sameh Hany Emile, Anjelli Wignakumar, Pauline Aeschbacher, Peter Rogers, Zachary Delgado, Matthew Greer, Steven D Wexner

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Ostomy continence devices: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024
    Pooled it
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

9 authors.

Justin DouradoEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Zoe GaroufaliaEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Sameh Hany EmileEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7854-5244
Anjelli WignakumarEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Pauline AeschbacherDepartment of General Surgery and Bariatric and Metabolic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Peter RogersEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Zachary DelgadoEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Matthew GreerEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.
Steven D WexnerEllen Leifer Shulman and Steven Shulman Digestive Disease Center, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8046-5753

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimColostomy complication rates range widely from 10% to 70%. The psychological burden on patients, leading to lifestyle changes and decreased quality of life (QoL), is one of the largest factors. The aim of this work was to assess the history and efficacy of ostomy continence devices in improving continence and QoL.

methodIn this PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and clinicaltrials.gov for studies on continence devices for all ostomies up to April 2023. Primary outcomes were continence and improvement in QoL. Secondary outcomes were leakage, patient's device preference and complications. Risk of Bias 2 and the revised tool to assess risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-1) were used to assess risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was graded using GRADE.

resultsTwenty-two studies assessed devices from 1978 to 2022. The two main types identified were ball-valve devices and plug systems. Conseal and Vitala were the two main devices with significant evidence allowing for pooled analyses. Conseal, the only currently marketed device, had a pooled rate of continence of 67.4%, QoL improvement was 74.9%, patient preference over a traditional appliance was 69.1%, leakage was 10.1% and complications was 13.7%. Since 2011, five studies have investigated experimental devices on both human and animal models.

conclusionOstomy continence has been a long-standing goal without a consistently reliable solution. We propose that selective and short-term usage of continence devices may lead to improved continence and QoL in ostomy patients. Further research is needed to develop a reliable daily device for ostomy continence. Future investigation should include the needs of ileostomates.

Indexed as

Fecal IncontinenceQuality of LifeColostomyFemaleHumansMalePostoperative Complicationscolostomymeta‐analysisostomy continence devicessystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38358053
PMCPMC12150823

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.