Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 616

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Defunctioning Stoma in Low Rectal Cancer Surgery

Hüser, Norbert, Michalski, Christoph W., Erkan, Mert, Schuster, Tibor, Rosenberg, Robert, Kleeff, Jörg, Friess, Helmut·2008·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

In Brief Summary Background Data: The role of a defunctioning stoma in patients undergoing low anterior resection for rectal cancer is still the subject of controversy. Recent studies suggest reduced morbidity after low anterior rectal resection with a defunctioning stoma. Methods: Retrospective and prospective studies published between 1966 and 2007 were systematically reviewed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anterior resections with or without defunctioning stoma were included in a meta-analysis. The pooled estimates of clinically relevant anastomotic leakages and of reoperations were analyzed using a random effects model (odds ratio and 95% confidence interval, CI). Results: Relevant retrospective single (n = 18) and multicenter (n = 9) studies were identified and included in the systematic review. Analysis of incoherent data of the leakage rates in these nonrandomized studies demonstrated that a defunctioning stoma did not influence the occurrence of anastomotic failure but seemed to ameliorate the consequences of the leak. Four RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The odds ratio for clinically relevant anastomotic leakage was 0.32 (95% CI 0.17–0.59), revealing a statistically significant benefit conferred through a defunctioning stoma (Z = 3.65, P = 0.0003). The odds ratio for reoperation because of leakage-caused complications was 0.27 (95% CI 0.14–0.51), with significantly fewer reoperations in patients with a defunctioning stoma (Z = 3.95, P < 0.0001). Overall mortality rates were comparable regardless of the presence of a defunctioning stoma. Conclusion: A defunctioning stoma reduces the rate of clinically relevant anastomotic leakages and is thus recommended in surgery for low rectal cancers. In this study, a systematic review and a meta-analysis of the role of defunctioning stoma in low rectal cancer surgery were performed, revealing that a stoma reduces the rate of clinically relevant anastomotic leakages. Furthermore, overall mortality rates were comparable. Thus, creation of a defunctioning stoma is recommended in surgery for low rectal cancers.

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 · 10.1097/sla.0b013e318176bf65

Cites

57 of 57 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 57 references

Cited by

See all 616

Metadata

Authors
Hüser, N., Michalski, C. W., Erkan, M., Schuster, T., Rosenberg, R., Kleeff, J., & Friess, H.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2008-07
Volume
248
Issue
1
Pages
52-60
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090473586
Cited by
616
References
57
FWCI
1.49
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: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Defunctioning Stoma in Low Rectal Cancer Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e318176bf65
The paper
Hüser, N., Michalski, C. W., Erkan, M., Schuster, T., Rosenberg, R., Kleeff, J., & Friess, H. (2008). Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Role of Defunctioning Stoma in Low Rectal Cancer Surgery. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e318176bf65

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.