ArticleScientific reports2025
A retrospective cohort study of the application of Santulli enterostomy in neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of Santulli enterostomy (SE) for necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) has been limited to a small number of studies involving a small number of patients and no control group. Our study aimed to compare the clinical safety and efficacy of Santulli enterostomy with those of single- or double-lumen enterostomy for neonatal NEC through a retrospective cohort study. One hundred ten patients who met the criteria were divided into an SE group (64 patients) and a conventional enterostomy (CE) group (46 patients). The CE group underwent single- or double-lumen enterostomy. There were no significant differences in complication rates or prognoses between the two groups after either procedure. Although the stoma was positioned higher in the SE group, the length of the unused small intestine (USI) was not significantly different. Multivariate analysis revealed that the length of the USI influenced the likelihood of malnutrition after enterostomy (OR = 1.108, P = 0.008). After stoma closure, compared with those in the CE group, the operation time, intestinal recovery time, fasting time, hospitalization time, intraoperative blood loss volume and the incidence of complications requiring surgical reintervention was significantly lower in the SE group. In conclusion, Santulli enterostomy is not only a safe treatment option for NEC but also an effective method for increasing the length of the small intestine after enterostomy, thereby improving the patient's postoperative nutritional status. In addition, the procedure is associated with good recovery and a reduced incidence of surgical reintervention after stoma closure.
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.