ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2025
Incidence of intestinal obstruction after sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the efficacy of laparoscopic sigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy combined with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 162 patients with low rectal cancer, who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection from January 2015 to January 2019 at the Affiliated Peace Hospital of Changzhi Medical College. Extraperitoneal stoma construction was performed in 98 patients (study group), while 64 patients (control group) underwent the procedure without suturing the pelvic peritoneum. All patients were followed up for 24 months postoperatively. The outcome measures were intra- and postoperative conditions and short- and long-term postoperative complications.
resultsThe patients in both groups successfully underwent laparoscopic surgery, and no conversion to laparotomy was required. The operation time (165.93 ± 24.91 vs 159.75 ± 21.60), intraoperative blood loss (120.71 ± 49.16 vs 120.63 ± 45.63), flatus elimination time (55.14 ± 10.67 vs 53.1 ± 10.53), and degree of cancer differentiation did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the pelvic peritoneal closure time (10.16 ± 1.98 vs 0.00), ostomy time (24.17 ± 2.26 vs 20.61 ± 2.0), and postoperative hospital stay duration (14.43 ± 2.49 vs 16.19 ± 3.50) showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). A comparison of the incidence of short-term complications between the two groups showed that intestinal obstruction occurred in three patients in the study group and eight patients in the control group, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05); however, the incidence of other complications did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). Moreover, comparing the long-term complications revealed no significant differences in the incidence of intestinal obstruction and perineal hernia between the two groups (P > 0.05). Long-term complications were reported in two patients in the study group (extraperitoneal stoma approach) and nine patients in the control group (intraperitoneal stoma approach), with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).
conclusionSigmoid extraperitoneal colostomy with pelvic peritoneal closure in abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer is safe and feasible. This approach can effectively reduce the postoperative incidence of intestinal obstruction, hospital stay duration, and stomal complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39832068What 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.