ArticleSurgery today2026
Sex differences in the risk profiles for anastomotic leakage following surgery for rectal cancer.
Article in Surgery today, 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.
- Impact of surgeon qualifications on the safety of Robot-Assisted surgery.Surgery today · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo clarify sex-specific differences in the risk profiles of anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal cancer surgery, for which sex is widely recognized as an important risk factor.
methodsThis retrospective multicenter study included 1,854 patients (1,196 men and 658 women) who underwent rectal cancer surgery with anastomosis between 2015 and 2025 at our institution. Patients were stratified by sex, and risk factors for AL (grade ≥ B) were analyzed separately using logistic regression. Interaction analyses between sex and perioperative factors were also conducted.
resultsAL occurred more frequently in men than in women (9.9% vs. 4.1%, respectively). In sex-stratified multivariate analyses, an anastomotic site ≤ 5 cm from the anal verge and transanal tube placement were identified as independent risk factors for AL in men, whereas minimally invasive surgery and the use of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging were associated with a reduced risk of AL. In women, a preoperative C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio ≥ 0.07 and operative period were independent risk factors for AL. A significant interaction was observed between sex and low anastomosis rates.
conclusionSex-specific differences in AL risk profiles have been suggested. Sex-specific risk assessment may contribute to more individualized strategies for diverting stoma decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42246981What 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.