ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Analysis of treatment methods and relapse factors of postoperative anastomotic stenosis in colorectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnastomotic stenosis following surgical intervention for colorectal cancer is a frequently encountered complication. Nevertheless, the optimal approach to effectively manage anastomotic stenosis at varying distances from the anal margin remains uncertain. The primary objective of this research endeavor was to explore the risk factors associated with recurrent anastomotic stenosis subsequent to colorectal cancer surgery, as well as to evaluate potential strategies for its management.
methodsThe present study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data and treatment outcomes of 244 patients who underwent colorectal surgery and were subsequently diagnosed with anastomotic stenosis. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the location of anastomotic stenosis relative to the anal verge: the low anastomotic stenosis group (n = 107) and the high anastomotic stenosis group (n = 137).
resultsThe severity of anastomotic stenosis was found to be significantly higher in the low anastomotic stenosis group compared to the high anastomotic stenosis group (71.0% vs 57.7%, P = 0.031). Furthermore, the high anastomotic stenosis group exhibited a greater inclination toward opting for endoscopic treatment when it came to the choice of treatment for anastomotic stenosis (62.8% vs 27.1%, P < 0.001). In addition, logistic regression analysis showed that stenosis length ≥ 0.8 cm (odds ratio = 0.481; 95% CI = 0.248-0.936; P = 0.031) and lymph node metastasis (OR = 0.559, 95%CI = 0.313-0.998, P = 0.049) were independent risk factor for recurrence of anastomotic stenosis. Finally further build colorectal surgery of tumor recurrent anastomotic stenosis nomogram prediction model, using the internal validation and calculation model of the receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) area under curve (AUC) to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of the model.
conclusionThere exist variations in the severity of anastomotic stenosis, the extent of stenosis, and the selection of treatment modalities across different anatomic locations. Regarding the choice of anastomotic treatment, patients with elevated anastomotic stenosis exhibited a preference for endoscopic intervention. Furthermore, a multivariate analysis showed that stenosis length equal to or greater than 0.8 cm and lymph node metastasis were autonomous risk factors for recurrence of benign stenosis after colorectal cancer surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39681680What 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.