47 Quality of reporting on anastomotic leaks in colorectal trials: A systematic review Table 3. Continued Reporting Element Number of publications Modality N = 60/95, 63% CT scan Not specified With contrast (not specified) With contrast enema With intravenous contrast With oral contrast Endoscopy Not specified Sigmoidoscopy Rectoscopy Proctoscopy Colonoscopy Enteroscopy Unspecified contrast studies Contrast enema Water soluble contrast enema Radiological contrast study Water soluble contrast study X-ray With contrast (e.g., not specified or water soluble) With contrast enema (e.g., not specified or water-soluble) Not specified Fluoroscopy Gastrograffin enema Ultrasound MRI PET 36 (60%) 6 (10%) 6 (10%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 13 (22%) 11 (18%) 5 (8%) 2 (3%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 20 (33%) 7 (12%) 3 (5%) 2 (3%) 5 (8%) 4 (7%) 1 (2%) 4 (7%) 3 (5%) 2 (3%) 1 (2%) Imaging findings N = 59/95, 62% Abdominal or pelvic collection / abscess in the proximity of the anastomosis Extravasation of contrast Presence of fluid/ air around the anastomosis Anastomotic dehiscence / Breakdown of any staple line / Anastomotic defect Fistula formation (e.g., rectovaginal fistula etc.) Fecal peritonitis Abscess with a communication to the anastomosis 54 (92%) 16 (27%) 9 (15%) 10 (17%) 9 (15%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) Re-intervention findings N = 12/95, 13% Evidence of an anastomotic defect or dehiscence Fistula formation Postoperative peritonitis Air, fluid, GI contents, or contrast material Pericolic abscess or phlegmon Pelvic, intraabdominal or retroperitoneal abscess Generalized purulent peritonitis Generalized fecal peritonitis 9 (75%) 3 (25%) 2 (17%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 1 (8%) 2
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw