Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39655125›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Evaluation of Morbidity and Mortality in Iatrogenic Colonic Perforation During Colonoscopy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ajibola A Adebisi, Daniel E Onobun, Adeola Adediran, Reginald N Ononye, Ethel O Ojo, Adedayo Oluyi, Ayotunde Ojo, Stephen Oputa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

8 authors.

Ajibola A AdebisiGeneral Surgery, Epsom and St Helier University NHS Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Daniel E OnobunOrthopaedics and Trauma, Warwick Hospital, South Warwickshire University NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, GBR.
Adeola AdediranPublic Health, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, NGA.
Reginald N OnonyeUrological Surgery, Glan Clwyd Hospital, Bodelwyddan, GBR.
Ethel O OjoOrthopaedics and Trauma, Warwick Hospital, South Warwickshire University NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, GBR.
Adedayo OluyiTrauma and Orthopaedics, University Hospital Leicester, Leicester, GBR.
Ayotunde OjoGeneral Surgery, Tunbridge Wells Hospital, Kent, GBR.
Stephen OputaGeneral Surgery, University of Nigeria, Enugu, NGA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis explores the clinical and patient-specific factors contributing to increased morbidity and mortality following iatrogenic colonic perforation (ICP) during routine colonoscopy. A comprehensive search of Scopus, PubMed (Medline), Embase, and Google Scholar was conducted, reviewing studies published between 2010 and 2024. Data were synthesized through thematic analysis for qualitative data and meta-analysis for quantitative outcomes. This study found the overall perforation rate during colonoscopy to be between 0.019% and 0.66%. The average age of patients was 68.91 years. The mortality rate was approximately 11%. Older patients had a higher risk of perforation and an increased mortality rate. Therapeutic colonoscopy carries a significantly higher risk of perforation compared to diagnostic colonoscopy. Diagnostic colonoscopies were more likely to cause larger perforations, which, in turn, carry greater morbidity than smaller perforations. The most common sites of perforation are the sigmoid colon and the rectosigmoid junction. The leading causes of perforation include diverticulitis, malignancy, abnormal sigmoid anatomy, and inflammatory bowel disease. About half of the perforations were discovered during or immediately after the procedure. The most common surgical interventions were resection with primary anastomosis and Hartmann's procedure. Operators with limited experience were more likely to cause perforations and experience delayed recognition of the issue. The results suggest that both clinical and patient-specific factors play critical roles in determining outcomes for patients experiencing ICP during routine colonoscopy. Early detection, timely intervention, and operator experience are key to improving patient survival and reducing complications. Furthermore, the study highlights the need for ongoing research to refine patient selection criteria and enhance postoperative care protocols, particularly for high-risk populations such as the elderly and those with significant comorbidities. This review underscores the importance of heightened vigilance in colonoscopy procedures, especially among vulnerable populations. Future research should focus on improving diagnostic protocols and treatment strategies to minimize the risks associated with ICP and enhance patient safety in routine colonoscopy practices.

Indexed as

clinical factorscomorbiditiesiatrogenic colonic perforation (icp)morbiditymortalityoperator experiencepatient-specific factorsperforation severityroutine colonoscopysurgical intervention

Identifiers

PMID39655125
PMCPMC11625968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.