Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 210

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Meta-Analysis Comparing Conventional End-to-End Anastomosis vs. Other Anastomotic Configurations After Resection in Crohn's Disease

Simillis, Constantinos, Purkayastha, Sanjay, Yamamoto, Takayuki, Strong, Scott A., Darzi, Ara W., Tekkis, Paris P.·2007·Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study compared outcomes between end-to-end anastomosis and other anastomotic configurations after intestinal resection for patients with Crohn's disease by using meta-analytical techniques. METHODS: Comparative studies published between 1992 and 2005 of end-to-end anastomosis vs. other anastomotic configurations were included. Using a random effects model, end points evaluated were short-term complications and perianastomotic recurrence of Crohn's disease. Heterogeneity was assessed and sensitivity analysis was performed to account for bias in patient selection. RESULTS: Eight studies (2 prospective, randomized, controlled trials; 1 nonrandomized, prospective; 5 nonrandomized, retrospective studies) reported on 661 patients who underwent 712 anastomoses, of which 383 (53.8 percent) were sutured end-to-end anastomosis and 329 (46.2 percent) were other anastomotic configurations (259 stapled side-to-side, 59 end-to-side or side-to-end, 11 stapled circular end-to-end). Anastomotic leak rate was significantly reduced in the other anastomotic configurations group (odds ratio (OR), 4.37; P = 0.02) and remained significantly lower in studies comparing only side-to-side anastomosis vs. end-to-end anastomosis (OR, 4.37; P = 0.02) and studies including only ileocolonic anastomosis (OR, 3.8; P = 0.05). Overall postoperative complications (OR, 2.64; P < 0.001), complications other than anastomotic leak (OR, 1.89; P = 0.04), and postoperative hospital stay (weighted mean difference, 2.81; P = 0.007) were significantly reduced in the side-to-side anastomosis group when considering studies comparing only side-to-side anastomosis vs. end-to-end anastomosis. There was no significant difference between the groups in perianastomotic recurrence and reoperation needed because of perianastomotic recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: End-to-end anastomosis after resection for Crohn's disease may be associated with increased anastomotic leak rates. Side-to-side anastomosis may lead to fewer anastomotic leaks and overall postoperative complications, a shorter hospital stay, and a perianastomotic recurrence rate comparable to end-to-end anastomosis. Further randomized, controlled trials should be performed for confirmation.

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/s10350-007-9011-8

Cites

6 of 6 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

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 210

Metadata

Authors
Simillis, C., Purkayastha, S., Yamamoto, T., Strong, S. A., Darzi, A. W., & Tekkis, P. P.
Venue
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Published
2007-10
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
1674-1687
ISSN
0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2014229988
Cited by
210
References
6
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Conventional End-to-End Anastomosis vs. Other Anastomotic Configurations After Resection in Crohn's Disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10350-007-9011-8
The paper
Simillis, C., Purkayastha, S., Yamamoto, T., Strong, S. A., Darzi, A. W., & Tekkis, P. P. (2007). A Meta-Analysis Comparing Conventional End-to-End Anastomosis vs. Other Anastomotic Configurations After Resection in Crohn's Disease. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-007-9011-8

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.