Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 875

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Increased Local Recurrence and Reduced Survival From Colorectal Cancer Following Anastomotic Leak: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Mirnezami, Alexander, Mirnezami, Reza, Chandrakumaran, Kandiah, Sasapu, Kishore, Sagar, Peter, Finan, Paul·2011·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the long-term oncological impact of anastomotic leakage (AL) after restorative surgery for colorectal cancer using meta-analytical methods. Outcomes evaluated were local recurrence, distant recurrence, and survival. BACKGROUND: Recurrence after potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer remains a significant clinical problem and has a poor prognosis. AL may be a risk factor for disease recurrence, however available studies have been conflicting. A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of AL on disease recurrence and long-term survival. METHODS: Studies published between 1965 and 2009 evaluating the long-term oncological impact of AL were identified by an electronic literature search. Outcomes evaluated included local recurrence, distant recurrence, and cancer specific survival. Meta-analysis was performed using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model to compute odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals. Study heterogeneity was evaluated using Q statistics and I and publication bias assessed with funnel plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies comprising 13 prospective nonrandomized studies, 1 prospective randomized, and 7 retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria, yielding a total of 21,902 patients. For rectal anastomoses, the odd ratios (OR) of developing a local recurrence when there was AL was 2.05 (95% CI = 1.51-2.8; P = 0.0001). For studies describing both colon and rectal anastomoses, the OR of local recurrence when there was an AL was 2.9 (95% CI = 1.78-4.71; P < 0.001). The OR of developing a distant recurrence after AL was 1.38 (95% CI = 0.96-1.99; P = 0.083). Long term cancer specific mortality was significantly higher after AL with an OR of 1.75 (95% CI = 1.47-2.1; P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: AL has a negative prognostic impact on local recurrence after restorative resection of rectal cancer. A significant association between colorectal AL and reduced long-term cancer specific survival was also noted. No association between AL and distant recurrence was found.

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.0b013e3182128929

Cites

12 of 12 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 12 references

Cited by

See all 875

Metadata

Authors
Mirnezami, A., Mirnezami, R., Chandrakumaran, K., Sasapu, K., Sagar, P., & Finan, P.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2011-05
Volume
253
Issue
5
Pages
890-899
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1967554342
Cited by
875
References
12
FWCI
16.54
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: Increased Local Recurrence and Reduced Survival From Colorectal Cancer Following Anastomotic Leak: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e3182128929
The paper
Mirnezami, A., Mirnezami, R., Chandrakumaran, K., Sasapu, K., Sagar, P., & Finan, P. (2011). Increased Local Recurrence and Reduced Survival From Colorectal Cancer Following Anastomotic Leak: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e3182128929

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.