We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Utility of intra-operative flexible sigmoidoscopy to assess colorectal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
ANZ Journal of Surgery 2020 October 6
BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) after colorectal resection leads to increased oncological and non-oncological, morbidity and mortality. Intra-operative assessment of a colorectal anastomosis with intra-operative flexible sigmoidoscopy (IOFS) has become increasingly prevalent and is an alternative to conventional air leak test. It is thought that intra-operative identification of an AL or anastomotic bleeding (AB) allows for immediate reparative intervention at the time of anastomosis formation itself. We aim to assess the available evidence for the use of IOFS to prevent complications following colorectal resection.
METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the literature between January 1980 and June 2020 was performed. Comparative studies assessing IOFS versus conventional air leak test were compared, and outcomes were pooled.
RESULTS: A total of 4512 articles were assessed, of which eight were found to meet the inclusion criteria. A total of 1792 patients were compared; 884 in the IOFS arm and 908 in the control arm. IOFS was associated with an increase in the rate of positive leak test (odds ratio (OR) 5.21, P > 0.001), a decrease in AL (OR 0.45, P = 0.006) and a decrease in post-operative AB requiring intervention (OR 0.40, P = 0.037).
CONCLUSION: In a non-randomized meta-analysis, IOFS increases the likelihood of identifying an anastomotic defect or bleeding intra-operatively. This allows for immediate intervention that decreases the rate of AL and AB. This adds impetus for performing routine IOFS after a left-sided colorectal resection with anastomosis and highlights the need for randomized controlled trial to confirm the finding.
METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the literature between January 1980 and June 2020 was performed. Comparative studies assessing IOFS versus conventional air leak test were compared, and outcomes were pooled.
RESULTS: A total of 4512 articles were assessed, of which eight were found to meet the inclusion criteria. A total of 1792 patients were compared; 884 in the IOFS arm and 908 in the control arm. IOFS was associated with an increase in the rate of positive leak test (odds ratio (OR) 5.21, P > 0.001), a decrease in AL (OR 0.45, P = 0.006) and a decrease in post-operative AB requiring intervention (OR 0.40, P = 0.037).
CONCLUSION: In a non-randomized meta-analysis, IOFS increases the likelihood of identifying an anastomotic defect or bleeding intra-operatively. This allows for immediate intervention that decreases the rate of AL and AB. This adds impetus for performing routine IOFS after a left-sided colorectal resection with anastomosis and highlights the need for randomized controlled trial to confirm the finding.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app