ArticleOncology letters2024
Usefulness of a powered circular stapler compared with a manual circular stapler in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: A retrospective cohort study and systematic review.
Article in Oncology letters, 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Current evidence on powered versus manual circular staplers in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- A Meta-analysis of Powered Circular StaplerIn vivo (Athens, Greece)Pooled it
- Impact of powered circular stapling devices on anastomotic leakage rates in colorectal surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postoperative complications related to anastomosis, including postoperative anastomotic bleeding and anastomotic leakage, remain a serious issue. The effect of anastomotic devices on suture complications during intestinal anastomosis remains unclear. The present study examined the utility of automated anastomotic devices for reducing anastomotic complication risks. A retrospective cohort study of colorectal cancer surgeries in which an anastomosis device was used at Osaka University Hospital (Suita, Japan) between January 2018 and December 2022 was conducted. Cases of emergency surgery, inflammatory bowel disease and simultaneous surgery for other cancers were excluded. Experienced gastrointestinal surgeons performed manual anastomosis using the ETHICON Circular Stapler CDH or EEA Circular Stapler, and automatic anastomosis using the ECHELON CIRCULAR Powered Stapler, with no observed operator bias. Additionally, a meta-analysis that included other study results was performed. The outcomes included postoperative complications, mainly anastomotic leakage. The study included 414 patients: 183 in the manual circular stapler group and 231 in the powered circular stapler (PCS) group. Although this retrospective study found no statistically significant association between the anastomotic device used and anastomotic complications, an increased risk ratio was observed in the manual group compared with the automatic group when restricted to elderly patients. Similarly, a meta-analysis found a significantly higher anastomotic complication risk in the manual group compared with the automatic group (random-effects model; odds ratio, 0.376; 95% confidence interval, 0.232-0.610; P<0.0001). The findings of the present study suggested that a PCS is useful for reducing the anastomotic complication risk in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.
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.