SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Effect of extensive mesenteric excision on primary ileocolic resection outcomes in Crohn's disease patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe role of mesenteric excision in Crohn's Disease (CD) remains uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the impact of extended vs. limited mesenteric excisions on intra- and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing primary ileocolic resection for CD.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ISRCTN up to February 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and retrospective studies comparing extended and limited mesenteric excision in primary ileocolic resections for CD were included. The primary outcome was endoscopic CD recurrence (Rutgeerts score ≥ i2). Secondary outcomes included severe endoscopic recurrence (≥ i2b or ≥ i3), surgical recurrence, anastomotic leaks, operative time, conversion to open surgery, severe postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay.
resultsOver the 2588 records initially screened, 4 studies were included, involving a total of 632 patients. Pooled analysis showed no significant difference in endoscopic recurrence rates between extended and limited resections (48.2% vs. 54.1%; RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.70-1.18; p = 0.46; I
conclusionExtended mesenteric excision does not appear to significantly reduce endoscopic recurrence compared with limited excision in primary ileocolic resections for CD. Until further high-quality evidence is available, surgical teams should adhere to their established practice and refrain from implementing extended resections outside well-designed prospective studies. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42025644791).
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.