| Title |
Functional outcomes with handsewn versus stapled anastomoses in the treatment of ultralow rectal cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Updates in Surgery, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13304-017-0507-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisa Ramage, Paul Mclean, Constantinos Simillis, Shengyang Qiu, Christos Kontovounisios, Emile Tan, Paris Tekkis |
| Abstract |
Adequate oncological outcomes have been demonstrated with rectal resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) in tumours in close proximity to the internal anal sphincter. Our aim was to assess functional differences between handsewn CAA and ultralow stapled anastomosis. Participants were identified from a single-surgeon series. Included participants underwent anorectal physiology testing of anal sphincter function, in addition to completion of several questionnaires: Wexner Incontinence Score (WIS); Birmingham Bowel, Bladder and Urinary Symptom Questionnaire (BBUSQ); Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) Score; SF36. Non-parametric data compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. 20 participants were included; 11 stapled and 9 handsewn. Mean follow-up was 2.95 ± 1.97 years. The mean LARS score was 21.9 ± 1.97 years in the stapled group versus 29.4 ± 9.57 in the handsewn group (p = 0.133). The Wexner incontinence score was significantly higher in the handsewn group (p = 0.0076), with a mean score of 4.6 ± 3.69 versus 10.9 ± 4.76. The incontinence domain of the BBUSQ was also significantly worse in patients with a handsewn anastomosis (p = 0.001). With the exception of general health (p = 0.035) and social functioning (p = 0.035), which were worse in the handsewn groups, the other six domains of the SF-36 showed no statistical difference between groups. Anorectal physiology scores were not significantly different. Handsewn CAA anastomosis is known to be safe and oncologically feasible. Patient selection should be vigorous, with preoperative counseling regarding the likelihood of incontinence to manage patients' expectations and promote comparable quality of life in the long-term. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 18% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#13,885,950
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Updates in Surgery
#282
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,066
of 442,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Updates in Surgery
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 642 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.