ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2026
Transanal drainage tube versus diverting stoma for reducing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains a significant postoperative concern in rectal cancer patients following anterior resection. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of a transanal drainage tube (TDT) versus a diverting stoma (DS) in reducing the incidence of this complication. Methods: The systematic review was conducted following a comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for all relevant studies published from inception to December 2025. For the meta-analyses, Review Manager 5.4 software was used, with a random-effects model applied as needed. Results: A total of seven studies encompassing 1,347 participants were included in the analysis. Overall, no significant difference in the risk of AL was observed between the TDT and DS groups [odds ratio (OR) =0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42 to 1.29, P=0.28]. Specifically, the TDT group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of bowel obstruction (OR =0.16, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.32, P<0.01). Rates of other complications and postoperative length of stay were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that no significant difference was observed between TDT and DS in reducing AL after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Notably, TDT use was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative bowel obstruction. For selected patients, TDT may offer a strategy to avoid stoma-related complications and the need for reversal surgery.
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.