ArticleSurgical endoscopy2009
Results of a multicenter study of 1,057 cases of rectal cancer treated by laparoscopic surgery.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs.International journal of colorectal disease · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- SAGES evidence-based guidelines for the laparoscopic resection of curable colon and rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Guideline
- Incidence and mortality of anastomotic dehiscence requiring reoperation after rectal carcinoma resection.International surgeryPooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Short-term results of a randomized study between laparoscopic and open surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Trial
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: results of a prospective multicentre analysis of 4,970 patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Trial
- Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection from a phase II trial to evaluate laparoscopic surgery for stage 0/I rectal cancer: Japan Society of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Lap RC.Surgical endoscopy · 2012Trial
- Laparoscopic lymph node dissection around the inferior mesenteric artery with preservation of the left colic artery.Surgical endoscopy · 2011Trial
- The Review of Modified Intersphincteric Resection in the Treatment of Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Has the open surgical approach in colorectal cancer really become uncommon?World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Transition from laparoscopic to robotic approach in rectal cancer: a single-center short-term analysis based on the learning curve.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Spotlight on laparoscopy in the surgical resection of locally advanced rectal cancer: multicenter propensity score match study.Annals of coloproctology · 2022Article
- A multicenter, propensity score-matched cohort study about short-term and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- Can better surgical outcomes be obtained in the learning process of robotic rectal cancer surgery? A propensity score-matched comparison between learning phases.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Transanal Tube Drainage as a Conservative Treatment for Anastomotic Leakage Following a Rectal Resection.Annals of coloproctology · 2018Article
- Open versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Advanced Low Rectal Cancer: A Large, Multicenter, Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study in Japan.Annals of surgery · 2018Article
- The feasibility of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of residual or recurrent tumor localized in therapeutic scar tissue.Endoscopy international open · 2017Article
- Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for a lower rectal tumor.Oncology letters · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to clarify the feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer retrospectively in 28 centers throughout Japan.
methodsBetween May 1994 and February 2006, 1,057 selected patients with rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic surgery. All the data regarding the patient details, and operative and postoperative outcome were collected retrospectively.
resultsMean follow-up was 30 months. Procedures included anterior resection in 938, abdominoperineal resection in 107, Hartmann's procedure in 10, and others in two patients. Conversion to open procedures occurred in 77 patients (7.3%). Postoperative surgical complications developed in 235 patients (22.2%), including anastomotic leakage in 84 (9.1%). Median length of postoperative hospital stay was 15 days (7-271 days). Patients with upper rectal cancer had shorter hospital stay than those with lower rectal cancer (14 versus 18 days, p < 0.01). Tumor-node-metastases (TNM) stage included 83(7.9%) stage 0, 495 (46.8%) stage I, 197 (18.6%) stage II, 230 (21.8%) stage III, and 52 (4.9%) stage IV. Recurrence was developed in 67 patients (6.6%) of the 1,011 curatively treated patients. Local recurrence occurred in 11 patients (1.0%). There was no port-site metastasis. Of the 1,011 curatively treated patients, the 3-year disease-free survival rate was 100% in stage 0, 94.6% in stage I, 82.1% in stage II, and 79.7% in stage III.
conclusionsLaparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe in selected patients with rectal cancer, with favorable short-term and mid-term outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18802736What 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.