Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39060622›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024

Anastomotic leak rate following the implementation of a powered circular stapler in elective colorectal surgeries: a retrospective cohort study.

Jessica J Lie, Nadeesha Samarasinghe, Ahmer A Karimuddin, Carl J Brown, P Terry Phang, Manoj J Raval, Amandeep Ghuman

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Circular stapler platform and the risk of anastomotic leakage after elective left colectomy and high anterior resection.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    Observational
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.

Jessica J LieDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7374-5730
Nadeesha SamarasingheDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Ahmer A KarimuddinDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Carl J BrownDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
P Terry PhangDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Manoj J RavalDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Amandeep GhumanDepartment of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. aghuman@providencehealth.bc.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-9871-9061

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this study was to compare the anastomotic leak rates between powered and manual circular staplers in elective left-sided colorectal resections.

methodsA retrospective cohort study of elective left-sided colorectal resections before and after implementation of a powered circular stapler at a tertiary care center was conducted. The manual stapler group consisted of consecutive resections performed between January 2016 to December 2016 and the powered stapler group, between September 2021 and December 2022. Primary outcome was 30-day anastomotic leak rate. A chi-squared analysis was performed to compare anastomotic leak rates. Factors associated with anastomotic leak were examined.

resultsTwo-hundred forty-seven patients were included: 154 in the manual stapler group and 93 in the powered stapler group. Mean (SD) age was 60 (15) years old, 37.7% were female and 72.9% of resections were performed for malignancy. Both groups had similar patient characteristics and surgical technique. Overall leak rate was 2.0% in the manual stapler group and 10.8% in the powered stapler group. The powered staplers were found to have 6.06 times the odds of leak compared to manual staplers (95% CI, 1.62-22.65; p = 0.01). None of the other factors were found to be associated with anastomotic leak.

conclusionsPatients who had left-sided colorectal anastomosis had higher anastomotic leak rates with powered compared to manual circular staplers. This finding is contrary to previous retrospective studies that found lower leak rates with powered staplers.

Indexed as

Anastomotic LeakElective Surgical ProceduresSurgical StaplersSurgical StaplingAdultAgedColectomyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAnastomotic leakBiomedical technologyColorectal surgerySurgical staplers

Identifiers

PMID39060622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.