SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2011
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.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 9 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
52 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Short-Term Outcomes of Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Prospective Evidence.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of the laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery within fast track surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2016Pooled 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
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014Pooled it
- Single-incision laparoscopic versus traditional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery--a cumulative meta-analysis and systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013Pooled it
- Guidelines for perioperative care in elective rectal/pelvic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society recommendations.World journal of surgery · 2013Guideline
- Single-port laparoscopic resection for diverticular disease: experiences with more than 300 consecutive patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Trial
- Nerve-oriented mesorectal excision (NOME): autonomic nerves as landmarks for laparoscopic rectal resection.International journal of colorectal disease · 2013Trial
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: results of a prospective multicentre analysis of 4,970 patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Trial
- Review
- Perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a retrospective study of 672 patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Predicting multiple linear stapler firings in double stapling technique with an MRI-based deep-learning model.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- 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
- Surgical site infection after laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer is associated with compromised long-term oncological outcome.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic multivisceral resection for locally advanced colon cancer: a single-center analysis of short- and long-term outcomes.Surgery today · 2020Article
- Minimally Invasive Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: A National Perspective on Short-term Outcomes and Morbidity.World journal of surgery · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer reveals comparable oncological outcome even in context of worse short-term results-long-term analysis of nearly 500 patients from two high-volume centers.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhether laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LS) can achieve the same oncologic outcomes compared with open surgery (OS) for rectal cancer remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is to compare oncologic adequacy of resection and long-term oncologic outcomes of LS with OS in the treatment of rectal cancer.
methodsLiterature searches of electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) and manual searches were performed to identify RCTs comparing values of oncologic adequacy of resection, recurrence, and survival following LS and OS.
resultsSix RCTs enrolling 1,033 participants were included in the meta-analysis. LS was associated with similar number of lymph nodes harvested and a similar distal tumor-free margin. LS was associated with a slightly high circumferential resection margin (CRM) positive rate with no significant difference (7.94% vs. 5.37%; risk ratio [RR], 1.13; P = 0.63). There was no significant difference between the two groups in local recurrence (RR, 0.55; P = 0.21). The 3-year overall survival advantage for LS over OS was not statistically significantly different (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; P = 0.11). The 3-year disease-free survival was not significantly different between the two groups (HR, 1.16; P = 0.64).
conclusionsThe meta-analysis suggests that there are no differences between laparoscopic-assisted and open surgery in terms of number of lymph nodes harvested, involvement of CRM, local recurrence, 3-year overall survival, and disease-free survival for rectal cancer. However, more high-quality studies are needed for further analysis due to the small number of included studies.
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.