MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preoperative risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage after colectomy for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4310591997 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vinícius Evangelista Dias, Pedro Alves Soares Vaz de Castro, Homero Terra Padilha, LARA VICENTE PILLAR, LAURA BOTELHO RAMOS GODINHO, Augusto Tinoco, RODRIGO DA COSTA AMIL, Aleida Nazareth Soares, Geraldo Magela Gomes da Cruz, Juliana Maria Trindade Bezerra, Thais Almeida Marques da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRelative riskMeta-analysisInternal medicineOdds ratioCochrane LibraryColectomyColorectal cancerCohort studyColorectal surgerySurgeryConfidence intervalAbdominal surgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: anastomotic leak (AL) after colectomy for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a life-threatening complication. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the preoperative risk factors for AL in patients submitted to colectomy. METHODS: the bibliographic search covered 15 years and 9 months, from 1st January 2005 to 19th October 2020 and was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, Europe PMC and Web of Science databases. The inclusion criteria were cross-sectional, cohort and case-control studies on preoperative risk factors for AL (outcome). The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for bias assessment within studies. Meta-analysis involved the calculation of treatment effects for each individual study including odds ratio (OR), relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) with construction of a random-effects model to evaluate the impact of each variable on the outcome. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: cross-sectional studies were represented by 39 articles, cohort studies by 21 articles and case-control by 4 articles. Meta-analysis identified 14 main risk factors for AL in CRC patients after colectomy, namely male sex (RR=1.56; 95% CI=1.40-1.75), smoking (RR=1.48; 95% CI=1.30-1.69), alcohol consumption (RR=1.35; 95% CI=1.21-1.52), diabetes mellitus (RR=1.97; 95% CI=1.44-2.70), lung diseases (RR=2.14; 95% CI=1.21-3.78), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (RR=1.10; 95% IC=1.04-1.16), coronary artery disease (RR=1.61; 95% CI=1.07-2.41), chronic kidney disease (RR=1.34; 95% CI=1.22-1.47), high ASA grades (RR=1.70; 95% CI=1.37-2.09), previous abdominal surgery (RR=1.30; 95% CI=1.04-1.64), CRC-related emergency surgery (RR=1.61; 95% CI=1.26-2.07), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RR=2.16; 95% CI=1.17-4.02), radiotherapy (RR=2.36; 95% CI=1.33-4.19) and chemoradiotherapy (RR=1.58; 95% CI=1.06-2.35). CONCLUSIONS: important preoperative risk factors for colorectal AL in CRC patients have been identified based on best evidence-based research, and such knowledge should influence decisions regarding treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista do Colégio Brasileiro de CirurgiõesSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207