ReviewCureus2026
Comparing Stapled and Hand-Sutured Colorectal Anastomoses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Cohorts Assessing Short- and Long-Term Complications.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Technical considerations for minimally invasive resection and reconstruction of redundant sigmoid colon.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare outcomes after stapled and hand-sewn colorectal anastomoses. The study was undertaken because complication patterns, such as anastomotic leak, surgical site infection (SSI), length of stay (LOS), and mortality, remain debated and may vary by technique. The objective was to evaluate whether either method showed a clear advantage across early and late outcomes. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature), and Google Scholar was completed for studies published from January 2015 to June 2025. Only observational studies that compared stapled with hand-sewn anastomosis and reported at least three clinical outcomes were included. The review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Although the review focused primarily on colorectal procedures, select small-bowel cohorts were included when outcomes were reported separately by technique. Six observational studies met eligibility criteria. Random-effects modelling was planned, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic, although limited numerical reporting in the source studies restricted full quantitative synthesis. Across studies, anastomotic leak, SSI, LOS, and mortality appeared similar between stapled and hand-sewn groups, and no consistent statistical advantage was described for either method. Stapled anastomosis often required less operative time, although this did not appear to change complication rates. Study heterogeneity was influenced by differences in surgical context, such as elective, emergency, or Crohn disease cases, yet sensitivity assessment suggested that these variations did not alter the overall direction of findings. The evidence suggests that both techniques remain safe options when used appropriately, though stronger conclusions would require more detailed and standardized outcome reporting.
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.