SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2026
Magnetic compression anastomosis in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review of early human experience.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMagnetic compression anastomosis (MCA) is one of the recent emerging sutureless minimally invasive techniques for maintaining the continuity of the intestine using magnetic compression. Despite its potential advantages, clinical application remains limited due to scarce evidence. The aim of this article is to review the current literature for this alternate method of bowel anastomosis.
methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 2025. Eligible studies reported MCA use in human subjects for gastrointestinal indications with at least one clinical outcome reported. Study quality was assessed using MINORS criteria for non-randomized studies and CARE guidelines for case reports.
resultsThirteen studies comprising 106 patients from nine countries were included (5 prospective first-in-human trials; 2 retrospective cohorts; 6 case reports). Clinical domains spanned adult gastrointestinal obstruction without general anesthesia, post-urological bowel reconstruction, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy reconstruction, metabolic surgery, and congenital rectal atresia. Anastomotic leakage attributable to MCA was 0% (0/106) across all studies, anatomical regions, and device types. Laparoscopic MCA reduced choledochojejunostomy time from 25 to 57 min to a median of 11 min. Pediatric MCA achieved sphincter-preserving atresia repair with excellent 3-year functional outcomes.
conclusionEarly clinical evidence suggests that MCA is a safe and feasible alternative to conventional suturing or stapling techniques, with encouraging short-term outcomes. It is a promising alternative technique, especially for high-risk cases who cannot undergo general anesthesia or for those with frozen abdomens. MCA with an endoscopic technique can enable immediate resumption of oncological treatment. Due to limited clinical evidence and lack of sufficient data, further clinical trials are warranted to establish safety, efficacy, and cost-benefit before widespread human application. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: 1268302.
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.