SynthesisScientific reports2025
Comparative pregnancy rate after colorectal resection versus other surgical procedures for deep infiltrating rectal endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rectal Shaving in Colorectal Endometriosis Surgery-Definition, Evidence and Variability.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Reproductive Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Surgery for Deep Endometriosis: A Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Observational
- Comprehensive Approaches to Endometriosis Management and Targeted Strategies for Bowel Endometriosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Bowel surgery for endometriosis-associated infertility: navigating amidst the certainty of the uncertainty.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2025Article
- Infertility management in patients with bowel endometriosis: the current landscape and the promise of randomised trialsFacts, views & vision in ObGyn · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The debate around colorectal surgery for endometriosis has been ongoing, but to date no meta-analysis has investigated the impact of the different surgical approaches on the pregnancy rate. The aim of this meta-analysis study was to determine in women with deep infiltrating rectal endometriosis, how does colorectal resection surgery compare to other surgical techniques (e.g., rectal shaving, disc excision) in terms of pregnancy rates. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Clinical Trials for relevant studies published from inception to December 2024. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all English language full-text articles addressing colorectal resection compared with other management of deep infiltrating rectal endometriosis and presenting pregnancy outcomes. We included a study when it (i) provided data on surgical management (shaving, disc excision, and/or colorectal resection) and (ii) detailed the pregnancy outcomes in each subgroup. Four authors independently performed the initial search to evaluate the eligibility criteria. Four authors extracted the data and a fifth author checked this extraction. Of the 113 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, we included 13 in the meta-analysis. These studies represented a total of 3,248 patients. Pregnancy information was available for 2,131 patients: 1073 colorectal resection, 502 shaving, 172 disc excisions, and 384 other practices (expectant management). Colorectal resection was associated with a lower pregnancy rate compared with the other techniques (N = 2,131, odds ratio [OR] = 0.64 [95% confidence interval 0.52-0.79], p < 0.001, I2 = 35%). There were similar results when comparing colorectal resection with rectal shaving (N = 952, OR = 0.51 [95% confidence interval 0.36-0.73], p < 0.001, I2 = 0%), but not when comparing colorectal resection with disc excision (N = 432, OR = 0.65 [95% confidence interval 0.37-1.13], p = 0.13). Conclusions Rectal resection for endometriosis is associated with a lower pregnancy rate compared with other type of surgery, such as shaving. Trial registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42024512328.
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.