ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2011
Laparoscopic and open abdominoperineal resection for cancer: how patient selection and complications differ by approach.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What have we learned in minimally invasive colorectal surgery from NSQIP and NIS large databases? A systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2018Pooled it
- Surgical Site Infections in Colorectal Cancer Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Surgical Approach and Associated Risk Factors.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Excluding the ischiorectal fossa irradiation during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with intensity-modulated radiotherapy followed by abdominoperineal resection decreases perineal complications in patients with lower rectal cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2019Article
- Article
- Case-matched comparison of the short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer.Surgery today · 2014Article
- Use of a multi-instrument access device in abdominoperineal resections.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOutcomes between laparoscopic (LAPR) and open abdominoperineal resections (OAPR) are poorly described.
methodsAfter IRB approval, 2005-2008 NSQIP data were used to identify patients undergoing LAPR and OAPR for rectal cancer. Logistic regression identified variables influencing the selection of LAPR vs. OAPR as well as the likelihood of postoperative events. Chi-square analysis was used to compare the incidence of 30-day postoperative events.
resultsOne thousand one hundred ninety-seven OAPRs and 143 LAPRs were identified. LAPRs were less likely to have a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 (p = 0.04) and were associated with equivalent mean operative times (p = 0.36). LAPRs and OAPRs were found to have similar rates of surgical site infections (p = 0.13), transfusion requirements (p = 0.17), myocardial infarction (p = 0.48), and need for reoperation within 30 days (p = 0.20). Neoadjuvant radiotherapy did not directly increase complication rates in either group. Few factors predicted choice of LAPR but included BMI <25 (OR, 1.54; p = 0.02).
conclusionComplication rates between LAPR and OAPR were similar despite the greater technical challenge of LAPR. Wound infection rates were equivalent, which may reflect similar rates of perineal wound infections. Few patients are offered LAPR, possibly due to surgeon preferance as opposed to patient factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21909844What 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.