ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Double-Barrel Urocolostomy After Pelvic Exenteration: Short-Term Morbidity and Patient-Reported Quality of Life.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTotal pelvic exenteration is a radical surgical procedure for advanced pelvic malignancies. Traditionally, an ileal conduit is created on the right abdominal wall for urinary diversion and an end-colostomy on the left abdominal wall for fecal diversion. However, this approach is associated with increased morbidity and a negative impact on quality of life (QoL). A unilateral double-barrel urocolostomy (DBUC) offers an alternative using the sigmoid colon for urinary drainage. This can potentially reduce complications, improve QoL, and preserve the right vertical rectus abdominis muscle (VRAM) flap for pelvic reconstruction. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the DBUC on 90-day morbidity and QoL of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for locally advanced colorectal and anal cancer.
methodsData were prospectively collected from all patients who underwent pelvic exenteration with DBUC reconstruction for colorectal and anal cancer at our tertiary care center between January 2020 and May 2023.
resultsThis study enrolled 20 patients. Postoperative complications were observed in 19 patients, including seven major complications. Two complications were directly attributable to the DBUC. Patients reported favorable QoL outcomes in terms of global health, functional ability, and symptom management, with expected limitations in physical performance due to extensive abdominal surgery. At 1 year after surgery, all the patients preferred the DBUC over separate bilateral ostomies.
conclusionThe DBUC procedure has demonstrated safety and efficacy in terms of short-term morbidity and favorable patient-reported QoL, making it an attractive alternative to dual ostomies for patients undergoing pelvic exenteration, particularly when VRAM reconstruction is considered.
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.