ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2011
Laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancer: evaluation of oncological efficacy.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safe adoption of robotic colorectal surgery using structured training: early Irish experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLaparoscopic resection of low rectal cancer poses significant technical difficulties for the surgeon. There is a lack of published follow-up data in relation to the surgical, oncological and survival outcomes in these patients.
aimThe aim of this study is to evaluate the surgical, oncological and survival outcomes in all patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancer.
methodsConsecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancers were included in the study. Clinical, pathological and follow-up data were recorded over a 4-year period. The mean follow-up was 25 months
resultsA total of 53 patients were included in the study, 30 of whom were males. The mean age was 64.14 years (range, 34-86 years). The mean hospital stay was 8.2 days (range, 4-42 days). Fifty were completed laparoscopically and three were converted to an open procedure. Thirty-eight were anterior resections and 15 were abdominoperineal resections. Twenty-four patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The total mesorectal excision was optimal in 51 (98%) cases. There were no anastomotic sequelae and no surgical mortality. There was no local recurrence detected. The overall survival (mean follow-up, 25 months) was 93.5%.
conclusionLaparoscopic resection for low rectal cancers permits optimum oncological control. In our series, this technical approach is associated with excellent 4-year survival and clinical outcomes.
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.