Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 515

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Postoperative Complications Following Surgery for Rectal Cancer

Paun, Bogdan C., Cassie, Scott, MacLean, Anthony R., Dixon, Elijah, Buie, W. Donald·2010·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review was designed to determine postoperative complication rates of radical surgery for rectal cancer (abdominal perineal resection and anterior resection). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lack of accepted complication rates for rectal cancer surgery may hinder quality improvement efforts and may impede the conception of future studies because of uncertainty regarding the expected event rates. METHODS: All prospective studies of rectal cancer receiving radical surgery published between 1990 and August 2008 were obtained by searching Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, as well as ASCO GI, CAGS, and ASCRS meeting abstracts between 2004 and 2008. There was no language restriction. The outcomes extracted were anastomotic leak, pelvic sepsis, postoperative death, wound infection, and fecal incontinence. Summary complication rates were obtained using a random effects model; the Z-test was used to test for study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Fifty-three prospective cohort studies and 45 randomized controlled studies with 36,315 patients (24,845 patients had an anastomosis) were eligible for inclusion. Most of the studies found were based in continental Europe (58%), followed by Asia (25%), United Kingdom (10%), North America (5%), and Australia/New Zealand. The anastomotic leak rate, reported in 84 studies, was 11% (95% CI: 10, 12); the pelvic sepsis rate, in 29 studies, was 12% (9, 16); the postoperative death rate, in 75 studies, was 2% (2, 3); and the wound infection rate, in 50 studies, was 7% (5, 8). Fecal incontinence rates were reported in too few studies and so heterogeneously that numerical summarization was inappropriate. Year of publication, use of preoperative radiation, use of laparoscopy, and use of protecting stoma were not significant variables, but average age, median tumor height, and method of detection (clinical vs. radiologic) showed significance to explain heterogeneity in anastomotic leak rates. Year of publication, study origin, average age, and use of laparoscopy were significant, but median tumor height and preoperative radiation use were not significant in explaining heterogeneity among observed postoperative death rates. With multivariable analysis, only average age for anastomotic leak and year of publication for postoperative death remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Benchmark complication rates for radical rectal cancer surgery were obtained for use in sample size calculations in future studies and for quality control purposes. Postoperative death rates showed improvement in recent years.

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.0b013e3181dae4ed

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 515

Metadata

Authors
Paun, B. C., Cassie, S., MacLean, A. R., Dixon, E., & Buie, W. D.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2010-05
Volume
251
Issue
5
Pages
807-818
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2043352332
Cited by
515
References
4
FWCI
7.84
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: Postoperative Complications Following Surgery for Rectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181dae4ed
The paper
Paun, B. C., Cassie, S., MacLean, A. R., Dixon, E., & Buie, W. D. (2010). Postoperative Complications Following Surgery for Rectal Cancer. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181dae4ed

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.