ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Prevention, Recognition, and Management of Anastomotic Leakage and Pelvic Sepsis After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Structured Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anastomotic leakage (AL) and pelvic sepsis remain important causes of morbidity after restorative rectal cancer surgery, affecting mortality, stoma-free survival, bowel function, and oncologic treatment. Reported rates after low anterior resection are approximately 5-20%. We conducted a structured narrative review of PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library through 20 July 2026, focusing on prevention, recognition, source control, and long-term recovery after low pelvic reconstruction. Most biological requirements for healing and principles of source control are approach-agnostic, whereas open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgeries create different technical conditions for pelvic exposure, stapler trajectory, articulation, tactile feedback, conversion, and fluorescence imaging. This review therefore integrates approach-specific technical constraints with post-discharge recognition, anatomy-based source control, and patient-centered long-term outcomes rather than treating these domains separately. Among preventive measures, combined mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics has the strongest support in elective, non-obstructed patients; indocyanine green fluorescence is a useful adjunct when perfusion is uncertain but does not replace assessment of tension or mechanical integrity. C-reactive protein is mainly useful for ruling out major complications, whereas contrast-enhanced computed tomography remains first-line imaging and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging is best reserved for selected small defects, chronic sinuses, or complex pelvic sepsis. Management should be driven first by physiology and then by leak timing and location, defect size, conduit viability, diversion status, and cavity drainability. Durable success includes sepsis control, anatomical healing, stoma reversal when feasible, and acceptable long-term function.
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.