ReviewCureus2024
A Systematic Review of Comparative Effectiveness of Interventions for Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: Impacts on Bowel Function and Quality of Life.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Therapeutic strategies for low anterior resection syndrome: an umbrella review of systematic reviews.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- Reducing Low Anterior Resection Syndrome After Low Rectal Cancer Surgery Using an Integrated Intra-Anal Balloon Training and Reminder Device: Feasibility Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Pharmacological Therapies for Bowel Dysfunction After Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review.Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2026Review
- Trajectories of psychological distress and associated factors in patients with postoperative Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: a longitudinal latent class analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Long-term electroacupuncture for low anterior resection syndrome in postoperative rectal cancer patients: case reports.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Post-radiation levator ani atrophy is associated with worse Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score after nonoperative management for locally advanced rectal cancer: a potential MRI biomarker.Frontiers in oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a common complication following sphincter-preserving surgical resection for rectal cancer, characterized by symptoms such as fecal incontinence, urgency, and altered bowel habits, which significantly affect patients' quality of life. This cluster of symptoms not only limits their day-to-day physical activity but also has a debilitating effect on their emotional and mental well-being, undermining their integration and overall psychological health. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of invasive and non-invasive interventions for LARS, including pelvic floor rehabilitation, transanal irrigation, and various surgical options such as sacral neuromodulation and stoma formation, either as part of primary surgery or as a definitive treatment option for refractory cases. We systematically searched relevant databases for studies published in the last decade, focusing on adult patients diagnosed with LARS post-low anterior resection (LAR), with outcomes assessed through bowel function and quality of life metrics. The review identified six studies that met our eligibility criteria; a pooled cohort of 794 patients was identified, with sample sizes ranging from 37 to 430 participants. Our analysis revealed that pelvic floor rehabilitation significantly improves bowel function and quality of life in patients with LARS; yet, the optimal management approach remains unclear due to variability in patient responses. These findings highlight the inherent complexity and heterogeneity of LARS management, underscoring the necessity for multifaceted and individualized treatment strategies. Although pelvic floor rehabilitation shows promise, especially among motivated patients, its long-term sustainability remains uncertain. Surgical options are typically reserved for severe cases and carry significant risks and psychological impacts. For patients identified as being at high risk for LARS, treatment options must be considered and discussed at an earlier phase of their care. Our review concludes with the need for a tailored, patient-centered approach to managing LARS, highlighting the importance of ongoing research to fill existing evidence gaps. There is a need for translational research across various treatment modalities, comparing their effects, cost-effectiveness, implementation strategies, and the consequent effects on patients' quality of life and mental health.
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.