MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396775164 · doi:10.1111/codi.17017

Using preoperative C‐reactive protein levels to predict anastomotic leaks and other complications after elective colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2024· review· en· W4396775164 on OpenAlexaff
Tyler McKechnie, Zacharie Cloutier, Vicki Archer, Lily Park, Lee Jc, Luke Heimann, Ashaka Patel, Dennis Hong, Cagla Eskicioglu

Bibliographic record

VenueColorectal Disease · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityCalgary General HospitalSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryC-reactive proteinSubgroup analysisColorectal surgeryAnastomosisMEDLINEElective surgerySurgeryCINAHLInternal medicineStrictly standardized mean differenceAbdominal surgeryInflammationPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim While postoperative C‐reactive protein (CRP) is used routinely as an early indicator of anastomotic leak (AL), preoperative CRP remains to be established as a potential predictor of AL for elective colorectal surgery. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is to examine the association between preoperative CRP and postoperative complications including AL. Method MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases were searched. Studies with reported preoperative CRP values and short‐term surgical outcomes after elective colorectal surgery were included. An inverse variance random effects meta‐analysis was performed for all meta‐analysed outcomes to determine if patients with or without complications and AL differed in their preoperative CRP levels. Risk of bias was assessed with MINORS and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Results From 1945 citations, 23 studies evaluating 7147 patients were included. Patients experiencing postoperative infective complications had significantly greater preoperative CRP values [eight studies, n = 2421 patients, mean difference (MD) 8.0, 95% CI 3.77–12.23, p < 0.01]. A significant interaction was observed with subgroup analysis based on whether patients were undergoing surgery for inflammatory bowel disease (X2 = 8.99, p < 0.01). Preoperative CRP values were not significantly different between patients experiencing and not experiencing AL (seven studies, n = 3317, MD 2.15, 95% CI −2.35 to 6.66, p = 0.35), nor were they different between patients experiencing and not experiencing overall postoperative morbidity (nine studies, n = 2958, MD 4.54, 95% CI −2.55 to 11.62, p = 0.31) after elective colorectal surgery. Conclusion Higher preoperative CRP levels are associated with increased rates of overall infective complications, but not with AL alone or with overall morbidity in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.038
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.271 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueColorectal DiseaseSame topicColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207