Efficacy of transanal drainage tube in preventing anastomotic leakage after surgery for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

Figure 1 Identification of studies via databases and registers. nTDT: Non-transanal drainage; AL: Anastomotic leakage.

Figure 2 Funnel plots based on symptomatic anastomotic leakage grades. A: Symptomatic leakage of grades; B: Leakage that required re-operation (grade C).

Figure 3 Comparison of anastomotic leakage rates between transanal drainage tube group and non-transanal drainage tube group in all patients. A: Analysis based on symptomatic leakage (grades B and C); B: Analysis based on leakage that required re-operation (grade C). OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

Figure 4 Sensitivity analysis of anastomotic leakage rates between transanal drainage tube group and non-transanal drainage tube group in the meta-analysis. A: Analysis based on symptomatic leakage (grades B and C); B: Analysis based on leakage that required re-operation (grade C). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are shown as circles and bars when each noted study is omitted. The dash lines show the pooled ORs and 95%CIs for all included studies.

Figure 5 Comparison of anastomotic leakage rates between transanal drainage tube group and non-transanal drainage tube group among patients without diverting stoma. A: Analysis based on symptomatic leakage (grades B and C); B: Analysis based on leakage that required re-operation (grade C). OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval.

Figure 6 Sensitivity analysis of anastomotic leakage rates between transanal drainage tube group and non-transanal drainage tube group in the sub-group meta-analysis. A: Analysis based on symptomatic leakage (grades B and C); B: Analysis based on leakage that required re-operation (grade C). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are shown as circles and bars when each noted study is omitted. The dash lines show the pooled ORs and 95%CIs for all included studies.