ReviewCureus2025
Post-operative Outcomes Following Urgent and Elective Surgery for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition affecting the large bowel. Surgery remains an important cornerstone in the treatment framework for UC, both in the elective setting for patients refractory to medical management and in the urgent setting for patients with acute severe UC. The aim of this study is to better define the risks associated with urgent surgery for acute severe UC when compared with elective surgery. This would allow clinicians to better outline the risks associated with urgent and elective bowel resections for UC and enable patients to make more informed decisions. A systematic review of the PubMed database was conducted independently by two authors looking at post-operative outcomes following bowel resection for UC within the elective and urgent settings. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were pre-established using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Study (PICOS) framework. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality post-operatively and secondary outcomes were infection and re-operation rates following elective and urgent surgery. Bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Score. A random effects meta-analysis was carried out. The absolute risk difference was calculated with 95% confidence intervals and p values for each of the primary and secondary outcomes. The systematic review yielded nine studies which were ultimately included within the meta-analysis. Infection rates following operation were included in two of these studies. Re-operation rates were included in four of these studies. A total of 5797 patients underwent urgent surgery and 12479 patients underwent elective surgery across the nine articles. Eight studies had a low risk of bias and one study had a medium risk of bias when assessed against the Newcastle-Ottawa Score. Overall, there was a 4.8% increased risk of mortality at 30 days post-operatively following urgent surgery when compared to elective surgery (Risk Difference (RD) = 0.048, 95% CI [0.027; 0.069], p < 0.001). This was statistically significant but the data showed significant heterogeneity (Q = 66.6, I
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.