ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2010
Laparoscopic TME in rectal cancer--electronic supplementary: op-video.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nerve-oriented mesorectal excision (NOME): autonomic nerves as landmarks for laparoscopic rectal resection.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013Trial
- Minimally Invasive Rectal Surgery: Current Status and Future Perspectives in the Era of Digital Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Transanal versus traditional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal carcinoma.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- [Scientific evidence for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2014Review
- Long-term oncologic outcome after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Different approaches for complete mobilization of the splenic flexure during laparoscopic rectal cancer resection.International journal of colorectal disease · 2012Article
- From Archiv für Klinische Chirurgie to Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery: 1860-2010.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer has been proved in various studies. The minimal invasive procedure is feasible and safe which was demonstrated in many studies. However, the results of prospective, randomized studies providing valuable evidence are still not available. Compared to conventional surgery, the laparoscopic technique has short-term advantages including less pain, shorter duration of postoperative ileus, less fatigue, better pulmonary function, and less blood loss (Leung et al., Lancet 363:1187-1192, 2004; Braga et al., Dis Colon Rectum 48:217-223, 2005; Jayne et al., J Clin Oncol 25:3061-3068, 2007; Agha et al., Surg Endosc 22:2229-2237, 2008).
methodsThe autonomic nerve sparing TME technique is the gold standard in rectal cancer resection even in conventional or laparoscopic procedure. With regard of the oncological dimension, the laparoscopic TME technique is not different compared to the open procedure. However, a standardized laparoscopic step-by-step procedure may simplify the operation and can reduce operation time.
resultsThere are no studies available which compare different types of TME procedures. Most surgeons start the operation left laterally mobilizing the sigmoid colon first. In the laparoscopic technique, we recommend the medial to lateral approach starting the operation at the right side of the rectum and sigmoid colon. A nerve sparing TME technique can be performed easier, and the identification of the left ureter may be simplified. After multiple workshops and extensive discussion with national and international experts, we developed a standardized laparoscopic "10 step TME procedure." Reviewing the results of laparoscopic TME the studies do not allow firm conclusions as to the questions of whether the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic TME is equal or superior to open TME (Breukink et al. 2006). Actually, we are waiting for large prospective randomized studies comparing laparoscopic TME with the traditional open procedure (Bonjer et al., Dan Med Bull 56:89-91, 2009).
conclusionLaparoscopic TME appears to have clinically measurable short-term advantages in patients with primary resectable rectal cancer based on evidence mainly from nonrandomized studies (Breukink et al. 5). In nearly all published studies, the efficacy and technical feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer could be demonstrated regarding perioperative morbidity and oncological outcome. A standardized laparoscopic TME technique can be strongly recommended.
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.