ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2026
Comparative outcomes of early and late rectourethral fistula: insights from a multicentric retrospective study on multidisciplinary management strategies.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to evaluate the natural history of early and late rectourethral fistulas (RUFs) and to determine the long-term outcomes of a multidisciplinary management approach.
methodsA multicenter retrospective study was performed on patients with RUF who were treated by a combined colorectal and urological team. Early RUF (ERUF) was defined as occurring within 31 days after surgery, while late RUF (LRUF) was defined as occurring thereafter. Surgical procedures and the surgeons involved were recorded, in addition to clinical assessments, radiological findings, and oncological assessments.
resultsA total of 72 patients diagnosed with RUF were treated between January 1, 2010, and June 2023. Patients were divided into ERUF (n=37) and LRUF (n=35) groups. After conservative management, comparisons of success rates for graciloplasty, York-Mason, and delayed coloanal anastomosis as second and third treatments showed higher rates for graciloplasty in ERUF than in LRUF (83% vs. 40%, P=0.034; 71% vs. 33%, P=0.500; and 60% vs. 40%, P>0.999, respectively). The ERUF group demonstrated significantly higher cure rates after the second treatment (83.8% vs. 40.0%, P<0.001). At final follow-up, complete healing was significantly more frequent in ERUF than in LRUF (83.8% vs. 42.9%, P<0.005). Definitive digestive and urinary diversion rates were lower in ERUF (13.5% vs. 48.5%, P=0.001; and 13.5% vs. 25.7%, P=0.240, respectively).
conclusionThese findings suggest that 30% of patients required a definitive colostomy, with a significantly higher proportion observed in the LRUF group. Moreover, repeated surgical procedures in the LRUF group were frequently unsuccessful.
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.