The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Factors associated with the occurrence of leaks in stapled rectal anastomoses: a review of 1,014 patients
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite improvement in surgical techniques and stapling devices during the last 10 years, colorectal anastomoses are still prone to leakage. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance and safety of stapled anastomoses in rectal surgery and to identify factors that influence the occurrence of anastomotic leaks. STUDY DESIGN: A review was undertaken of 1,014 patients who underwent stapled anastomoses to the rectum or anal canal for colorectal cancer or benign disease between 1989 and 1995 in a tertiary care institution. Indications for operations, comorbidities at admission, preoperative bowel preparation, stapler size, intraoperative events, associated surgical procedures, and clinical outcomes were tested for any association with anastomotic leak. RESULTS: A double stapled technique was used in 154 patients and a conventional single stapler technique was used in 860. Postoperative mortality was 1.6%, and the overall morbidity was 18.4%. Clinically apparent anastomotic leak developed in 29 patients (2.9%). Anastomotic dehiscence occurred in 22 of 284 patients (7.7%) after low stapling (within 7 cm from the anal verge) and in 7 of 730 patients (1%) after high stapling (p < 0.001). Diabetes mellitus, use of pelvic drainage, and duration of surgery were significantly related to the occurrence of anastomotic leak by the univariate analysis. Multivariate regression analysis identified an anastomotic distance from the anal verge within 7 cm as the only variable related to the occurrence of postoperative leak (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Low anastomoses were associated with a leak rate greater than with high colorectal anastomoses. We conclude that anastomoses to the rectum using the circular stapler can be done with low mortality and morbidity.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Defunctioning Stoma in Low Rectal Cancer Surgery
Hüser, N., Michalski, C. W., Erkan, M., Schuster, T., Rosenberg, R., Kleeff, J., & Friess, H. (2008) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318176bf65 · Cited by 616
Meta-analysis of defunctioning stomas in low anterior resection for rectal cancer
Tan, W. S., Tang, C. L., Shi, L., & Eu, K. W. (2009) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.6594 · Cited by 478
Eriksen, M. T., Wibe, A., Norstein, J., Haffner, J., Wiig, J. N., & the Norwegian Rectal Cancer Group (2005) · Colorectal Disease · doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2004.00700.x · Cited by 351
Trencheva, K., Morrissey, K. P., Wells, M., Mancuso, C. A., Lee, S. W., Sonoda, T., Michelassi, F., Charlson, M. E., & Milsom, J. W. (2013) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318262a6cd · Cited by 323
Self-citationAnastomotic leakage after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: The impact of fibrin glue
Huh, J. W., Kim, H. R., & Kim, Y. J. (2010) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.01.018 · Cited by 114
Metadata
- Authors
- Vignali, A., Fazio, V. W., Lavery, I. C., Milsom, J. W., Church, J. M., Hull, T. L., Strong, S. A., & Oakley, J. R.
- Venue
- Journal of the American College of Surgeons
- Published
- 1997-08
- Volume
- 185
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 105-113
- ISSN
- 1072-7515 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2033451464
- Cited by
- 550
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.44
- 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: Factors associated with the occurrence of leaks in stapled rectal anastomoses: a review of 1,014 patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1072-7515(01)00891-2
- The paper
- Vignali, A., Fazio, V. W., Lavery, I. C., Milsom, J. W., Church, J. M., Hull, T. L., Strong, S. A., & Oakley, J. R. (1997). Factors associated with the occurrence of leaks in stapled rectal anastomoses: a review of 1,014 patients. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1072-7515(01)00891-2
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.