ReviewCureus2026
Omentoplasty to Prevent Anastomotic Leak in Colorectal Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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.
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
Anastomotic leakage (AL) increases morbidity and mortality in colonic and rectal surgery. Omentoplasty (OMP), the use of a pedicled flap from the omentum to shield the anastomotic site, has been proposed as a potential method to prevent this complication. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of OMP in reducing the incidence of AL and its clinical repercussions. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing OMP and non-omentoplasty (n-OMP) in colonic and rectal surgeries. Mean differences (MDs) were computed for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics. Statistical analysis was performed using R software, version 4.3.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Eight studies (four RCTs and four observational studies) involving a total of 5,330 patients were included, with 806 patients (15%) in the OMP group and 4,524 patients (85%) in the n-OMP group. Clinical AL, reported in three studies that distinguished leak type, was significantly reduced in the OMP group (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.15-0.81; p=0.01; I²=0). There were no significant differences in overall AL (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.33-1.12; p=0.11; I²=56%), radiological AL (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.40-1.47; p=0.42; I²=0%), reoperation rates (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.37-1.08; p=0.09; I²=0%), mortality (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.33-1.86; p=0.58; I²=25%), or postoperative infection rates. OMP was not associated with a significant reduction in overall or radiological AL. Clinical AL, however, was significantly lower in the OMP group, a finding drawn from a small subset of studies that may point to a role for OMP in containing the consequences of a leak rather than preventing it outright. No significant differences were observed in reoperation rates, mortality, or postoperative infection rates. Given the heterogeneity and inclusion of observational data, further RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.
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.