ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2025
European expert consensus on a structured approach to circular stapling anastomosis in minimally invasive left-sided colorectal resection.
Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- ColoRobotica: Structured training in robotic colorectal surgery.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- European expert consensus on a structured approach to circular stapling anastomosis in minimally invasive left-sided colorectal resection.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThe aim of this work is to develop and operationally define performance metrics that characterize a reference approach to circular stapling anastomosis during minimally invasive left-sided colorectal resection and to obtain face and content validity through a consensus meeting.
methodThree expert colorectal surgeons with advanced experience with minimally invasive surgery, a senior behavioural scientist and a research fellow with experience in performance metrics development formed the Metrics Group. Technical support was provided by device engineers. Published guidelines, training materials, manufacturers' instructions for use and unedited videos of circular stapling anastomosis in minimally invasive left-sided colorectal resection were used to deconstruct the task into defined, observable performance units or metrics (i.e. procedural phases, steps, errors and critical errors). The performance metrics were then subjected to detailed review by 16 expert colorectal surgeons in a modified Delphi process.
resultsPerformance metrics for circular stapling anastomosis during minimally invasive left-sided colorectal resection had three procedural phases with 32 steps, 40 errors and 38 critical errors. After the modified Delphi process the agreed performance metrics consisted of three procedural phases, 36 steps, 42 errors and 39 critical errors. A group of expert colorectal surgeons from Europe verified the face and content of these metrics. After discussion, all procedural phases received unanimous consensus by the Delphi panel.
conclusionCircular stapling anastomosis during the minimally invasive approach to left-sided colorectal resection can be broken down into procedural phases and steps, with errors and critical errors known as performance metrics. We consider the metrics essential for the development of structured training in using circular stapling anastomosis in the minimally invasive approach to left-sided colorectal resection.
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.