Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24363114›Full record

ReviewSurgery today2014

Distal dissection in total mesorectal excision, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy and lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer.

Jin-ichi Hida, Kiyotaka Okuno, Tadao Tokoro

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Surgery today, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jin-ichi HidaDepartment of Surgery, Kinki University School of Medicine, 377-2 Ohno-Higashi, Osaka-Sayama, Osaka, 589-8511, Japan, hida@surg.med.kindai.ac.jp.
Kiyotaka Okuno
Tadao Tokoro

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The local recurrence rate after total mesorectal excision (TME) appears to be markedly lower than that after conventional operations. We reviewed all relevant articles identified from the MEDLINE databases and clarified the rationale for TME. It is clear that distal intramural spread is rare. Even when present, such spread is not likely to extend beyond 2 cm. Data with attention to mesorectal cancer deposits suggest that mesorectal clearance of at least 4-5 cm distal to the tumor should be sufficient. TME should be performed for most tumors of the mid- and lower rectum. This does not mean that the gut tube needs to be divided at the same level in every case. Dissection of the distal mesorectum off the gut tube can be performed, so the distal line of division of the bowel wall can be made at a minimum of 2 cm below the tumor if such a maneuver would ensure that the sphincters are preserved. In cases with cancer in the upper third of the rectum, the mesorectum and gut tube can safely be divided 5 cm below the tumor without jeopardizing the recurrence rates. Our findings indicate that TME is an essential treatment approach for rectal cancer, and lateral lymph node dissection and preoperative chemoradiotherapy are additional therapies that should be considered for advanced rectal cancer.

Indexed as

Chemoradiotherapy, AdjuvantPreoperative CareDigestive System Surgical ProceduresHumansLymph Node ExcisionMEDLINENeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRectal NeoplasmsRectumSurvival Rate

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.