Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2013
Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: results of a prospective multicentre analysis of 4,970 patients.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 8 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Critical appraisal of predictive tools to assess the difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2018Guideline
- A meta-analysis of short-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery on colorectal carcinoma.Medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Short-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic vs open rectal excision for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Pooled it
- The comprehensive therapeutic effects of rectal surgery are better in laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- Laparoscopy for rectal cancer is oncologically adequate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Pooled 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
- Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision compared to open surgery.World journal of gastroenterology · 2012Trial
- Short-term results in a population based study indicate advantage for minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery versus open.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Long term oncological outcomes for laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer - A population-based nationwide noninferiority study.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022Article
- Failure to rescue following proctectomy for rectal cancer: the additional benefit of laparoscopic approach in a nationwide observational study of 44,536 patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Observational
- Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Non-Metastatic Rectal Cancer.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Article
- [Evidence in minimally invasive oncological surgery of the colon and rectum].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program Combined With Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Review
- Survival outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer: a two-center cohort study with propensity score matching.Gastroenterology report · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic and open surgery in rectal cancer patients in Germany: short and long-term results of a large 10-year population-based cohort.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Analysis of factors potentially predicting prognosis of colorectal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Article
- Benchmarking of aggregated length of stay after open and laparoscopic surgery for cancers of the digestive system.BJS open · 2018Article
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer and analyse the results of the multidisciplinary audited project on total mesorectal excision conducted in Spain.
backgroundThe safety and therapeutic efficiency of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are controversial due to the technical difficulties it involves. A deviation from the oncological principles of mesorectal excision would mean a potential increase in local recurrence and shorter survival.
methodsThis prospective non-randomised multicentre study includes 4,970 patients with rectal cancer. The study compares perioperative, postoperative, anatomicopathological and survival variables.
resultsFive hundred and sixty five patients were excluded. Of the remaining 4,405, 3,018 (68.51%) had open surgery (OS) and 1,387 (31.49%) laparoscopic surgery (LS). The rate of anterior resections was higher in the LS group. The rate of intraoperative tumour perforation, number of red blood cell concentrates transfused and length of hospital stay were greater in the OS group, whereas surgical time was longer in the LS group. The incidence of complications was 45.6% in the OS group and 38.3% in the LS group. Involvement of the circumferential and distal margin, as well as unsatisfactory and partially satisfactory quality of the mesorectum, were greater in the OS group. There were no differences for local recurrence and survival rates.
conclusionsAccording to these results, laparoscopic surgery is the best option for the surgical treatment of rectal cancer, with similar rates of local recurrence and survival, although there are oncological indicators in this study to suggest that these results can be improved with laparoscopic surgery.
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.