ArticleJournal of the anus, rectum and colon2024
Usefulness of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy for Ulcerative Colitis in the Era of Laparoscopic Surgery - A Single-center Observational Study.
Article in Journal of the anus, rectum and colon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Current status of fertility rates and modes of delivery after restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) combines the benefits of laparoscopic surgery with the tactile feedback from open surgery. In the current era of laparoscopic surgery, the significance of HALS as a technical transition has diminished. This study clarified the usefulness of HALS in restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) for ulcerative colitis (UC) in the era of laparoscopic surgery. Methods: The 212 patients who underwent RPC with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis between 2007 and 2023 were included in this study. The patients were divided into three groups, open surgery (OS), HALS, and conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAP), and their characteristics, surgical outcomes, surgical complications, and functional outcomes were compared. Results: The number of surgical techniques was OS in 21 cases, HALS in 184 cases, and LAP in 7 cases. The number of surgeons was two for OS and HALS, and four for LAP, with OS and HALS having fewer surgeons than LAP. The length of the skin incision was 13, 7, and 3 cm for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, and the operation times was 250, 286, and 576 minutes for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, with LAP having the longest operation time. The postoperative complications and function did not differ markedly among the three groups. Conclusions: In RPC for UC, HALS involved fewer surgeons and a shorter operative time than LAP. Even in the era of laparoscopic surgery, HALS remains a useful option, especially when a shorter operation time is required or when the number of available surgeons is insufficient.
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.