ArticleBMC surgery2025
Comparison of side-to-side anastomosis vs. end-to-end anastomosis in NOSES operation for left colon cancer: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC surgery, 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.
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
objectiveTo analyze and compare the application and efficacy of side-to-side anastomosis and end-to-end anastomosis in natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) NOSES operation for left colon cancer.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 69 patients in our hospital from February 2018 to February 2022 who underwent NOSES for left colon tumors. The observation group was performed with side-to-side anastomosis (Overlap). For digestive tract reconstruction, the control group was anastomosed by end-to-end anastomosis; the intraoperative and postoperative conditions and complications were compared between the two groups.
resultsThere was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the intraoperative anastomosis time in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (P < 0.001). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the time of first exhaustion, defecation time, degree of patency of defecation, frequency of defecation, postoperative hospital stays and postoperative pain between the two groups (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the overall incidence of postoperative complications did not show a significant difference (P > 0.05).
conclusionsIn the NOSES surgery of left colon cancer, both side-to-side anastomosis (Overlap) and end-to-end anastomosis yielded comparable intraoperative and postoperative conditions and complications, but the side-to-side anastomosis (Overlap) method was simpler operation-wise and had a shorter intraoperative anastomosis time. As such, this method is the preferred anastomosis method when NOSES for colorectal cancer is carried out in primary hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR1900026104 (2019-09-21).
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.