ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2009
[Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer].
Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of enteral glutamine on inflammatory and hormonal response in patients with rectal cancer during preoperative radiochemotherapy.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2017Trial
- A hundred patients with vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous (VRAM) flap for pelvic reconstruction after total pelvic exenteration.International journal of colorectal disease · 2014Article
- Comparative analysis of late functional outcome following preoperative radiation therapy or chemoradiotherapy and surgery or surgery alone in rectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy has become established treatment for rectal cancer. It is indicated when primary R0 resection is not an option, in cases of higher risk of locoregional relapse following surgical treatment alone, and when initially impossible conservation of the anal sphincter becomes possible in conjunction with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. The indication for radiochemotherapy in the upper third of the rectum is still controversial. Reevaluation of the tumor situation following neoadjuvant treatment is necessary before decisions on operative strategy. Modern imaging techniques are limited in this respect, as they hardly allow differentiation between living tumor tissue and lesions. In case of doubt clarity is possible only through surgical exploration, taking R1 resection into account. Overall the recognition of lymph node metastasis is not a sufficient indicator of local relapse. The frequency of postoperative complications following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy is independent of the operative method. The effect of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy on long-term survival and formation of distant metastases is still not clarified. Current studies seek clarification through the use of new chemotherapies and modified treatment regimes. Further, the correct time interval between the end of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and the following surgical therapy has yet to be determined. This applies also to the management of patients following complete remission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19350306What 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.