SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2006
Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 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
- Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of the short- and long-term results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopy-assisted and conventional open surgery for rectal cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2011Pooled it
- Laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on oncologic adequacy of resection and long-term oncologic outcomes.International journal of colorectal disease · 2011Pooled it
- Wound infection after a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer.Surgery today · 2008Pooled it
- Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: outcomes in 513 patients.World journal of surgery · 2013Trial
- Ultrasonically activated scalpel versus monopolar electrocautery shovel in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2008Trial
- Urogenital dysfunction in patients after miniinvasive restorative low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Article
- The risk factors for benign small bowel obstruction following curative resection in patients with rectal cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2018Article
- An evidence-based medicine approach to the laparoscopic treatment of colorectal cancer.Fukushima journal of medical science · 2016Review
- Reduced perioperative death following laparoscopic colorectal resection: results of an international observational study.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Observational
- SILS v SILS+1: a Case-Matched Comparison for Colorectal Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015Article
- Single-Incision Laparoscopic Colon and Rectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2015Review
- Changing the Way We Manage Rectal Cancer-Standardizing TME from Open to Robotic (Including Laparoscopic).Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2015Review
- Improving the outcomes in oncological colorectal surgery.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
- Integration of open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer resection: oncologic and short-term outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Laparoscopic and converted approaches to rectal cancer resection have superior long-term outcomes: a comparative study by operative approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Role of laparoscopy in rectal cancer: a review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
- Influence of conversion on the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer compared with primarily open resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Article
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer: a literature review and recommendations from the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic resection (LR) has become increasingly popular for the management of rectal cancer. Despite a decade of experience, the safety and efficacy of LR for rectal cancer remains to be established. This report performs a meta-analysis to compare LR with conventional open resection (CR) in patients with rectal cancer.
methodsUsing a defined search strategy, studies directly comparing CR with LR for rectal cancer were identified. The data for patients with rectal cancer treated with both approaches were extracted and used in our meta-analysis. Open surgery and laparoscopic surgery were compared in terms of postoperative mortality, morbidity, complications, oncological clearance, operating time, and time before recovery to a normal diet.
resultsCompared with CR, LR is associated with lower morbidity rates [OR 0.63 (0.41, 1.96) P=0.03], longer operating times [weighted mean difference 1.59 (1.20, 1.98) P<0.00001], similar mortality rates, wound healing disorder rates, urinary disorder rates, cardiopulmony disease rates, all leakage rates, all abscess rates and a positive rate of margin.
conclusionLR is associated with less postoperative morbidity, but longer operation time. A prospective randomized controlled trial is warranted to fully investigate these and other outcome measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16463181What 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.