SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2024
Effect of powered circular stapler in colorectal anastomosis after left-sided colic resection: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- Prevention and management of anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection: evolving trends among Italian surgeons. A SICCR survey.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- 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 · 2026Observational
- Bow tie technique for single stapled colorectal anastomosis: observational cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnastomotic leak (AL) remains the most important complication after left-sided colic anastomoses and technical complications during anastomotic construction are responsible of higher leakage incidence. Powered circular stapler (PCS) in colorectal surgery has been introduced in order to reduce technical errors and post-operative complications due to the manual circular stapler (MCS).
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. An electronic systematic search was performed using Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase of studies comparing PCS and MCS. The incidence of AL, anastomotic bleeding (AB), conversion, and reoperation were assessed. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024512644.
resultsFive observational studies were eligible for inclusion reporting on 2379 patients. The estimated pooled Risk Ratios for AL and AB rates following PCS were significantly lower than those observed with MCS (0.44 and 0.23, respectively; both with p < 0.01). Conversion and reoperation rate did not show any significant difference: 0.41 (95% CI 0.09-1.88; p = 0.25) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.33-1.84; p = 0.57); respectively.
conclusionThe use of PCS demonstrates a lower incidence of AL and AB compared to MCS but does not exhibit a discernible influence on reintervention or conversion rates. The call for future randomized clinical trials aims to definitively clarify these issues and contribute to further advancements in refining surgical strategies for left-sided colonic resection.
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.