AIM:To provide a comprehensive evaluation of the role of a protective stoma in low anterior resection(LAR)for rectal cancer.METHODS:The Pub Med,EMBASE,and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies and relevant literature published between 2007 and 2014 regarding the construction of a protective stoma during LAR.A pooled risk ratio(RR)with 95%confidence intervals(CIs)was used to assess the outcomes of the studies,including the rate of postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperations related to leakage.Funnel plots and Egger’s tests were used to evaluate the publication biases of the studies.P values<0.05 were considered statistically significant.RESULTS:A total of 11 studies were included in the meta-analysis.In total,5612 patients were examined,2868 of whom had a protective stoma and 2744 of whom did not.The sample size of the studies varied from 34 to 1912 patients.All studies reported the number of patients who developed an anastomotic leakage and required a reoperation related to leakage.A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled RR with the corresponding 95%CI because obvious heterogeneity was observed among the 11 studies(I2=77%).The results indicated that the creation of a protective stoma during LAR significantly reduces the rate of anastomotic leakage and the number of reoperations related to leakage,with pooled RRs of 0.38(95%CI:0.30-0.48,P<0.00001)and 0.37(95%CI:0.29-0.48,P<0.00001),respectively.The shape of the funnel plot did not reveal any evidence of obvious asymmetry.CONCLUSION:The presence of a protective stoma effectively decreased the incidences of anastomotic leakage and reoperation and is recommended in patients undergoing low rectal anterior resections for rectal cancer. AIM: To provide a comprehensive evaluation of the role of a protective stoma in low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. METHODS: The Pub Med, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies and relevant literature published between 2007 and 2014 regarding the the construction of a protective stoma during LAR. A pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was used to assess the outcomes of the studies, including the rate of postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperations related to leakage. Funnel plots and Egger’s tests were used to evaluate the publication biases of the studies. P values ​​<0.05 were were statistically significant .RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In total, 5612 patients were examined, 2868 of whom had a protective stoma and 2744 of whom did not.The sample size of the study varied from 34 to 1912 patients. All studies reported the number of patients who developed an anastomotic leakage and required a reoperation related to leakage. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled RR with the corresponding 95% CI as obvious heterogeneity was observed among the 11 studies (I2 = 77%). The results indicated that the creation of a protective stoma during LAR significantly reduced the rate of anastomotic leakage and the number of reoperations related to leakage, with pooled RRs of 0.38 (95% CI: 0.30-0.48, P <0.00001) and 0.37 (95% CI: 0.29-0.48, P <0.00001) The shape of the funnel plot did not reveal any evidence of obvious asymmetry. CONCLUSION: The presence of a protective stoma effectively decreased the incidences of anastomotic leakage and reoperation and is recommended in patients undergoing low rectal anterior resections for rectal cancer.