Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 464

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Surgeons lack predictive accuracy for anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery

Open access
Karliczek, A., Harlaar, N. J., Zeebregts, C. J., Wiggers, T., Baas, P. C., van Dam, G. M.·2009·International Journal of Colorectal Disease

Abstract

The dramatic clinical consequences of anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery can be reduced by a diverting stoma or drainage of the peri-anastomotic area. Currently, the surgeons’ clinical judgement is of major importance in decision making, but reliable data of the diagnostic accuracy are lacking. In this prospective clinical study, the surgeons’ predictive accuracy for anastomotic leakage was evaluated. In 191 patients undergoing colorectal resection with anastomosis, the risk for anastomotic leakage was determined by the surgeon on the basis of a visual analogue scale (VAS). This risk assessment was compared to the actual occurrence of anastomotic leakage post-operatively. A total of 26 (13.6%) patients showed anastomotic leakage. The surgeons’ median predicted leakage rate was 7.1% in anastomoses >15 cm from the anal verge and 9.5% ≤15 cm (sensitivity 38/62%, specificity 46/52%). Diagnostic accuracy was not influenced by the surgeons’ training level (VAS score, surgeons 7.8% vs assistant surgeons 8.5%, p = 0.96, sensitivity 41% vs 44%, specificity 59% vs 48%, p = 0.20). The surgeons’ clinical risk assessment appeared to have a low predictive value for anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery. The low a priori risk of anastomotic leakage of 14% resulted in a low post-test odds (11%) of correct prediction of anastomotic leakage. This warrants the ongoing search for a better diagnostic test of anastomotic leakage to prevent morbidity and mortality.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00384-009-0658-6

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 464

Metadata

Authors
Karliczek, A., Harlaar, N. J., Zeebregts, C. J., Wiggers, T., Baas, P. C., & van Dam, G. M.
Venue
International Journal of Colorectal Disease
Published
2009-02-17
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
569-576
ISSN
  • 0179-1958 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1262
OpenAlex
W1987582597
Cited by
464
References
1
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Surgeons lack predictive accuracy for anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00384-009-0658-6
The paper
Karliczek, A., Harlaar, N. J., Zeebregts, C. J., Wiggers, T., Baas, P. C., & van Dam, G. M. (2009). Surgeons lack predictive accuracy for anastomotic leakage in gastrointestinal surgery. International Journal of Colorectal Disease. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-009-0658-6

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.