ArticleSurgical endoscopy2011
Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 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
70 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 152 citations in OpenAlex.
- The aortic calcification is a risk factor for colorectal anastomotic leakage.Updates in surgery · 2023Pooled it
- The learning curve of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excisions: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- Short- and Long-Term Oncological Outcome After Rectal Cancer Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Open Versus Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2018Pooled it
- Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs.International journal of colorectal disease · 2016Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 3-year follow-up outcomes.International journal of colorectal disease · 2016Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches to Colorectal Cancer: Learning Curve and Cost Considerations.Cancers · 2026Review
- AI-Assisted Recognition of Actual Ureteral and Pancreatic Injuries in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Video Review Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: perioperative outcomes and survival.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Anastomotic Leak Following Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026Review
- Increasing robotic rectal cancer surgery may not increase total hospital costs.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative perioperative outcomes of articulated versus conventional straight devices in laparoscopic low anterior resection: a propensity score-matched analysis.Annals of coloproctology · 2025Article
- Robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a cumulative sum analysis for the learning curve.Surgery today · 2024Article
- [Predictability of anastomotic leaks in visceral surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Learning Curve for Robotic Colorectal Surgery.Cancers · 2024Review
- Predictive Factors for Anastomotic Leakage Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Efficacy of staple line reinforcement by barbed suture for preventing anastomotic leakage in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022Article
- Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2022Review
- Impact of near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green on structural sequelae of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic intersphincteric resection of malignant rectal tumors.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- The Role of Indocyanine Green Fluorescence in Rectal Cancer Robotic Surgery: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2022Review
- Available prediction scores of conversion for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery seem to be unsuitable for nowadays rectal cancer management.BMC surgery · 2022Article
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer is considered to be more technically demanding than laparoscopic colectomy. This study aimed to analyze the learning curve for laparoscopic low anterior resection and to identify the factors that influence this learning curve.
methodsData from 250 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer, excluding patients with a combined resection such as cholecystectomy, hepatectomy, hysterectomy, or gastrectomy, between December 1996 and April 2010 were analyzed. For operative time, the learning curve was analyzed using the moving average method. The conversion rate and the postoperative complication rate were evaluated in five groups of up to 50 patients each based on the number of cases required for analysis of operative time. In addition, risk factors that influenced conversion to open surgery and postoperative complications were analyzed.
resultsThe learning curve analysis for operative time using the moving average method showed stabilization at 50 cases. The conversion rate decreased significantly by group 4 (151-200 cases). The postoperative complication rate decreased significantly by group 5 (201-250 cases). The significant factors for conversion to open surgery were male sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.6094; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-6.4) and T stage (OR, 2.4793; 95% CI, 1.1-5.8). For postoperative complications, male sex (OR, 3.8590; 95% CI, 1.9-3.8) was significant. In addition, the risk factors for anastomotic leakage were male sex (OR, 15.7659, 95% CI, 3.2-284.8) and multiple firing (2 or more cartridges for rectal transection) (OR, 3.0589; 95% CI, 1.1-9.5).
conclusionsThe risk factors affecting the learning curve for laparoscopic low anterior resection were T stage and male sex. In laparoscopic low anterior resection, rectal transection in particular can be technically difficult, and standardization for accurate performance of the same technique for expanded indications is very important.
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.