ArticleSurgical endoscopy2012
Laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer: effects of conversion on long-term oncologic outcomes.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Conversion during laparoscopic colorectal resections: a complication or a drawback? A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.International journal of colorectal disease · 2015Pooled it
- Article
- Impact of the endoscopic surgical skill qualification system on conversion to laparotomy after low anterior resection for rectal cancer in Japan (a secondary analysis of the EnSSURE study).Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Outcomes of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: an observational single hospital study of 300 cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Observational
- Influence of Conversion and Anastomotic Leakage on Survival in Rectal Cancer Surgery; Retrospective Cross-sectional Study.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019Article
- Article
- Does robotic rectal cancer surgery improve the results of experienced laparoscopic surgeons? An observational single institution study comparing 168 robotic assisted with 184 laparoscopic rectal resections.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Observational
- Robotic gastrointestinal surgery.Current problems in surgery · 2018Review
- Conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer: What is the impact on short-term outcomes and survival?World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Critical appraisal of laparoscopic vs open rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2016Article
- The short-term and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 colon cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- The impact of laparoscopic converted to open colectomy on short-term and oncologic outcomes for colon cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015Article
- Integration of open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer resection: oncologic and short-term outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Laparoscopic vs open extended right hemicolectomy for colon cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Article
- Laparoscopic and converted approaches to rectal cancer resection have superior long-term outcomes: a comparative study by operative approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Does conversion affect short-term and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopy for colorectal cancer?Surgical endoscopy · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effects of conversion to open surgery during laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer on long-term oncologic outcomes still are unclear.
methodsAll 450 laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer performed at a single center between 1994 and 2008 and included in a prospectively maintained database were considered. Patients who required conversion to open surgery (CONV) were matched 1:2 with laparoscopically completed cases (LAP) and 1:5 with open surgery cases (OPEN) for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, year of surgery, tumor location, and tumor stage. Fisher's exact, chi-square, and Wilcoxon tests were used as appropriate. Kaplan-Meier curves were compared to analyze survival.
resultsIn this study, 31 CONV cases were independently compared with 62 LAP and 155 OPEN cases. Compared with the LAP and OPEN patients, the CONV patients were characterized by a numerically higher rate of preoperative comorbidity (61.3% vs LAP, 51.6; P = 0.4 and OPEN, 48.4%; P = 0.2), male gender (77.4% vs LAP, 59.7%; P = 0.09 and OPEN, 58.1%; P = 0.05), and a significantly higher mean body mass index (29.6 vs LAP, 26.8; P = 0.012 and OPEN, 28.8; P = 0.3). The pathologic tumor stage, location, and chemotherapy and radiotherapy rates were comparable among the groups. After a median follow-up period of 4.1, 4.2, and 4.6 years, the 5-year disease-free survival rate was significantly lower for the CONV patients (40.2%) than for the LAP (70.7%, P = 0.01) or the OPEN (63.3%, P = 0.04) patients. However, the 5-year cancer-specific survival rates were similar among the CONV (94.4%), LAP (86.1%, P = 0.36), and OPEN (84.9%, P = 0.14) patients.
conclusionsConversion to open surgery does not affect oncologic outcomes, although CONV patients have increased comorbidity rates affecting long-term mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22237758What 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.