ReviewSurgical endoscopy2005
Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: outcomes in 194 patients and review of the literature.
Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of eight studies.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015Pooled it
- Short-term follow-up after laparoscopic versus conventional total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer in a large teaching hospital.International journal of colorectal disease · 2014Trial
- Laparoscopic anterior resection and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective nonrandomized study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2007Trial
- Retrospective analysis of surgical and oncological results of laparoscopic surgeries performed by residents of coloproctology.Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2023Article
- Standard versus eversion-modified double-staple technique for low colorectal anastomoses after resection of rectal cancer.Surgery today · 2021Article
- Impact of minimally invasive surgery on short-term outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm within the setting of an enhanced recovery program.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients: a comparison of laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic techniques.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Clinical implications of preoperative chemoradiotherapy prior to laparoscopic surgery for locally advanced low rectal cancer.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2017Article
- [Laparoscopic rectal resection technique].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016Article
- Total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: Laparoscopic vs robotic surgery.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Article
- The Learning Curve of Robotic-Assisted Low Rectal Resection of a Novice Rectal Surgeon.World journal of surgery · 2016Article
- Colovaginal anastomosis: A totally unacceptable surgical error.International journal of surgery case reports · 2015Article
- Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for extraperitoneal rectal cancer: long-term results.International journal of colorectal disease · 2014Article
- Efficacy of single-layer continuous suture of the posterior wall in anastomosis involving a difficult location of the digestive tract.Oncology letters · 2014Article
- Laparoscopy-assisted posterior low anterior resection of rectal cancer.BMC gastroenterology · 2014Article
- Laparoscopic and converted approaches to rectal cancer resection have superior long-term outcomes: a comparative study by operative approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Single-layer continuous suture contributes to the reduction of surgical complications in digestive tract anastomosis involving special anatomical locations.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2014Article
- Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery following preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.Journal of the Korean Surgical Society · 2012Article
- Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision: is there a learning curve?Surgical endoscopy · 2012Article
- Systemic inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional colectomy for cancer: a matched case-control study.Surgical endoscopy · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are few reports on laparoscopic rectum resection demonstrating its feasibility and efficacy in patients with rectal cancer. Most patient series are small, and results must be considered preliminary and medium-term. Our large prospective conducted study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a totally laparoscopic resection for rectum carcinoma with emphasis on perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes.
methodsBetween November 1992 and July 2003, 194 unselected patients were resected laparoscopically for rectal carcinoma. Patients with locally advanced rectum carcinoma (uT3/uT4) and no evidence of distant metastases were candidates for neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Adjuvant treatment was administered to patients with UICC stage II/III disease. All patients were followed up prospectively to evaluate complications and late outcomes. Survival probability analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Study selection was made by Medline search using the following key words: rectal cancer, rectal neoplasms, laparoscopy, and resection. Single case reports and abstracts were excluded. When surgical series were reported more than once, only the most recent reports were considered and listed.
resultsThe most common procedures were low anterior resection with total mesorectum excision in 65.5% of patients and high anterior resection in 25.3%. Average operative time was 174 min. Average number of lymph nodes removed was 25.4 and length of specimen resected was 27.6 cm. Resection was curative in 145 patients and palliative in 49 cases. UICC tumor stages were as follows: stage I: 25.2%, stage II: 27.3%, stage III: 30.4%, and stage IV: 17%. Intraoperative complications were <1% for lesions of the ureter, urinary bladder, and deferent duct. Conversion to conventional surgery was necessary in two cases (1%). The most common postoperative complication was anastomotic leakage in 13.5% of patients. There was no postoperative mortality. Follow-up evaluation ranged from 1 to 128 months with a mean of 46.1 months. The most common late complication was incisional hernia in 3.6% of patients. Port-site metastases occurred in one patient (0.5%). Tumor recurrence developed in 23 of the 145 curative resected patients (11.7% distant metastases and 4.1% local recurrence). Overall local recurrence rate was 6.7% (4.1% after curative resection and 14.3% after palliative resection). Overall survival rate was 90.6% at 1 year, 74.5% at 3 years, and 66.3% at 5 years. Overall 5-year survival rate was 76.9% after curative resection and 31.8% after palliative resection. Cancer-related survival rate was 94% at 1 year, 82.4% at 3 years, and 78.9% at 5 years. At 5 years it was 87.7% after curative resection and 48.5% after palliative resection. At 5 years, the survival rate was 100% for stage I, 94.4% for stage II, 66.6% for stage III, and 44.6% for stage IV.
conclusionsOur results and the literature review clearly demonstrate that laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer is not associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Established oncological and surgical principles are respected and long-term outcomes are at least as good as those after open surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.