ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Gunsight closure versus conventional techniques for reversal of protective stoma after rectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching study.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2026. 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
backgroundSurgical site infection (SSI), wound-related complications, and incisional hernia are common concerns following stoma reversal. These complications can significantly impair postoperative recovery and quality of life, especially in rectal cancer patients. This study compared the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of two protective stoma reversal procedures, the gunsight and conventional linear closure techniques.
methodsA retrospective propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted on 194 patients who underwent stoma reversal between 2016 and 2023. Baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and patient satisfaction were compared between the gunsight and conventional closure groups. A structured, self-designed questionnaire based on the principles of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was administered at 6 months post-operatively to assess pain relief, wound healing, scar appearance, and functional recovery.
resultsAfter PSM, 97 matched pairs were analyzed. The gunsight group had significantly lower SSI rates (11.34% vs. 22.68%, p = 0.036) and reported lower postoperative pain scores on POD 1 (p < 0.001) and POD 2 (p = 0.003). No significant differences were observed in terms of operative time, hospital stay, wound dehiscence, or incidence of incisional hernia. Patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief was significantly greater in the gunsight group (p = 0.012), whereas overall satisfaction scores were comparable.
conclusionThe gunsight closure technique reduces postoperative infections and early postoperative pain without increasing complication rates. It also improves early patient-reported outcomes, making it a safe, effective, and patient-centered alternative for stoma reversal in rectal cancer surgery.
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.