Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40497183›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

Prophylactic Pelvic Drainage of Extraperitoneal Rectal Anastomoses: A Friend or a Foe?

Iraklis Perysinakis, Paraskevi Karona, Vasilis Christodoulou, Dimosthenis Michelakis, Evangelia E Vassalou, Eelco De Bree

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Iraklis PerysinakisDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, GRC.
Paraskevi KaronaDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, GRC.
Vasilis ChristodoulouDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, GRC.
Dimosthenis MichelakisDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, GRC.
Evangelia E VassalouDepartment of Medical Imaging, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, GRC.
Eelco De BreeDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University Hospital of Heraklion, Heraklion, GRC.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role of prophylactic drain placement after rectal resections with extraperitoneal anastomosis remains unclear and controversial. A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing clinical outcomes of patients with drained and undrained extraperitoneal colorectal or coloanal anastomoses. The primary outcome was anastomotic leakage (AL), whereas secondary outcomes included the impact of drainage on mortality, postoperative bowel obstruction, wound infection, reoperation rate, and length of hospital stay.  Three RCTs and four CCTs that met the inclusion criteria were identified. Two RCTs were judged at a low risk of bias and one at unclear risk. Among CCTs, three were considered to be of fair and one of good methodological quality. Significant discrepancies were encountered among these studies in terms of study design, definition of endpoints, population characteristics, and several technical aspects that render patients' grouping for conclusion extraction at least demanding, if not unsafe.  In conclusion, there is not sufficient evidence to support routine drainage after rectal surgery with extraperitoneal anastomosis, although drain insertion does not appear to increase postoperative morbidity.

Indexed as

anastomotic leakageextraperitoneal anastomosislow anterior resectionprophylactic drainagerectal surgery

Identifiers

PMID40497183
PMCPMC12151310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.