ArticlePloS one2025
National trends in utilization and outcomes of elective open and minimally invasive colostomy reversal: A NSQIP analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic Hartmann reversal is associated with reduced postoperative complications compared with laparoscopic approach: a propensity-weighted NSQIP study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Study of Treatment with Intensified Omeprazole to Prevent High-Output Stoma-A Protocol for a Randomized, Parallel-Group, Open-Label, Superiority Trial in Adults Undergoing Ileostomy (STOP-HOS-1).Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Association of pylorus preservation with outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy across the United States.Surgery open science · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive approach for reversal of Hartmann's procedure remains understudied. This study examined the outcomes associated with open and minimally invasive approaches for colostomy reversal in a national cohort.
methodsThe 2012-2022 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participant use file data was queried to identify all adult (≥18 years) patients undergoing elective open or minimally invasive colostomy takedown. Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the associations between operative modalities and outcomes of interest, including overall complications (cardiac, respiratory, infectious, wound, renal and thromboembolic postoperative sequelae as well as reoperation and transfusion), operative duration, postoperative length of stay, and 30-day Readmissions.
resultsAmong the 20,163 patients who underwent colostomy takedown during the study period, 6,180 (30.7%) had a minimally invasive reversal. Utilization of minimally invasive colostomy reversal increased from 18.2% in 2012 to 41.9% in 2022 (nptrend < 0.001). Following risk adjustment, minimally invasive colostomy takedown was associated with reduced odds of overall complications compared to the open approach (AOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.51-0.62). The minimally invasive approach was associated with decremental operative duration by 16.9 minutes (95% CI 13.6 to 20.2 minutes) and postoperative length of stay by 1.70 days (95% CI 1.56 to 1.84 days), as well as decreased odds of 30-day readmission (AOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67-0.85).
conclusionsOver the past decade, utilization of minimally invasive colostomy reversal has more than doubled and yielded lower overall complication rates compared to the open approach. Our findings suggest that the minimally invasive approach may be appropriate for colostomy takedown in suitable cases.
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.