ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Institution-level framework to estimate the impact of BMI on operative decision-making in patients undergoing colorectal surgery in a provincial cohort.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Mesenteric Adipose Tissue as a Modulator of Intestinal Inflammation: Mechanistic Insights and Model Systems in Crohn's Disease.European journal of immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn colorectal surgery, a higher body mass index (BMI) is associated with increased technical difficulty, reduced use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), and higher rates of conversion to open. While these associations are well established, less is known about how they vary across systems and providers. The study presents a methodological framework that evaluates the impact of obesity on operative approach and conversion risk in colorectal surgery and compares these associations between a provincial Canadian cohort (Nova Scotia (NS)) and National-Surgical-Quality-Improvement-Program (NSQIP), accounting for procedure-, surgeon-, and hospital-level variations.
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis was performed using NS (n = 3373) and NSQIP (n = 243,221) data between 2018 and 2022. Adult patients undergoing elective colectomy or proctectomy were included. Operative approach (open vs. laparoscopic) and conversion to open were the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively, and were compared between cohorts across BMI categories. Multivariate logistic regression identified independent predictors of conversion, with further stratification by procedure, surgeon, and hospital. Data analysis was performed using RStudio.
resultsLaparoscopic utilization was lower in NS than NSQIP (36.4% vs. 49.3%, p < 0.0001), while conversion rates were higher (23.1% vs. 19.3%, p = 0.02). BMI was a significant independent predictor of conversion in both cohorts (NS 2.54, CI 1.23-5.50; NSQIP 1.61, CI 1.27-2.03), with a stronger effect in NS. A clear volume-outcome relationship emerged of surgeons with higher laparoscopic utilization had lower conversion rates, particularly in right hemicolectomies and anterior resections. Institutional factors were not independently associated with conversion.
conclusionObesity markedly increases the risk of conversion in minimally invasive colorectal surgery, with greater impact in NS compared to NSQIP. Surgeon-level variation, rather than hospital factors, primarily drives differences in conversion. This study presents foundational evidence for perioperative decision-making and offers an opportunity for incorporating remote proctoring by higher-volume laparoscopic providers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42301473What 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.