SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2026
Segmental versus extended colectomy for colonic Crohn's disease in advanced therapy era: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Segmental versus extended colectomy for colonic Crohn's disease in advanced therapy era: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal extent of resection for colonic Crohn's disease (CD) remains controversial. Segmental colectomy (SC) may preserve bowel and avoid permanent stoma but has been historically associated with higher recurrence than extended colectomy (EC). In the advanced therapy era, contemporary data and Bayesian methods may refine this risk-benefit balance.
methodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to December 1, 2025. The primary outcome was surgical recurrence; secondary outcomes were reoperation, permanent stoma, overall postoperative complications, and mortality. Frequentist random-effects models (restricted maximum likelihood) were used to pool odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with heterogeneity assessed by I
resultsFive observational studies (1095 patients; 501 SC, 594 EC) were included. Surgical recurrence did not differ significantly between SC and EC (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.53-2.50; I
conclusionIn contemporary observational evidence, SC and EC show broadly comparable outcomes for surgical recurrence, reoperation, complications, and mortality, while SC is strongly favored with respect to permanent stoma avoidance. Operative decision-making should weigh a probable increase in recurrence risk after SC against the clinically meaningful functional benefit of stoma preservation, recognizing the limitations imposed by observational designs, heterogeneity, and sparse data.
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.