ArticleSurgical endoscopy2014
Laparoscopic and converted approaches to rectal cancer resection have superior long-term outcomes: a comparative study by operative approach.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
- 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
- Does conversion during minimally invasive rectal surgery for cancer have an impact on short-term and oncologic outcomes? Results of a retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Operative Approach Does Not Impact Radial Margin Positivity in Distal Rectal Cancer.World journal of surgery · 2021Article
- Are oncological long-term outcomes equal after laproscopic completed and converted laparoscopic converted rectal resection for cancer?Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Long-term oncologic outcome and risk factors after conversion in laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2020Article
- 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
- Analysis of Early and Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes After Converted Laparoscopic Resection Compared to Primary Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer.World journal of surgery · 2018Article
- Multicentre propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Comparison of short-term and oncologic outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic resection for mid- and distal rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Conversion in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: Are short-term outcomes worse than with open surgery?Techniques in coloproctology · 2016Article
- Right-Sided Diverticulitis Requiring Colectomy: an Evolving Demographic? A Review of Surgical Outcomes from the National Inpatient Sample Database.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2016Article
- Conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer: What is the impact on short-term outcomes and survival?World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review.World journal of methodology · 2015Article
- The evolution of colorectal cancer genetics-Part 2: clinical implications and applications.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe goal of this study was to evaluate outcomes for rectal cancer resection by operative approach. Our hypothesis is that laparoscopic (LAP) and LAP converted to open (OPEN) rectal cancer resections have excellent patient and oncologic outcomes.
methodsReview of a prospective database identified curative rectal cancer resections. Patients were stratified by operative approach: LAP, OPEN, or CONVERTED. Oncologic and clinical outcomes data was examined for each operative approach.
resultsOverall, 294 patients were analyzed-116 LAP (39.5%), 153 OPEN (52.0%), and 25 (8.5%) CONVERTED. Groups were comparable in demographics. Mean distal margin, circumferential resection margin, and lymph nodes harvested were comparable. The median length of stay was 4 days (range 1-20) LAP, 6 days (range 3-13) CONVERTED, and 8 days (range 1-35) OPEN (p < 0.01). More OPEN had postoperative complications (p < 0.01)-complication rates were 43.8% OPEN, 32.0% CONVERTED, and 21.5 % LAP. Unplanned readmissions and reoperations were similar (21.6% OPEN, 16.0% CONVERTED, 12.1% LAP). Overall 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 98.3%, and local recurrence rate was 2.0%. By approach, DFS was 100% CONVERTED, 93.1% LAP, and 87.6% OPEN (p = 0.31). Overall survival (OS) was 100 % CONVERTED, 99.1% LAP, and 97.4%. OPEN. Local recurrence was 0% CONVERTED, 2% OPEN, and 2.6% LAP. 3-year DFS for LAP and CONVERTED was superior to OPEN (p = 0.05), with comparable local recurrence (p = 0.07) and OS rates (0.43).
conclusionsLAP and converted procedures have comparable or superior clinical and oncologic outcomes. More procedures should be approached through a LAP approach. If the procedure cannot be completed laparoscopically, outcomes are not compromised for converted patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24515259What 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.