Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24789126›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2014

Long-term oncologic outcomes of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction: comparison with emergency surgery.

Ji Min Choi, Changhyun Lee, Yoo Min Han, Minjong Lee, Young Hoon Choi, Dong Kee Jang, Jong Pil Im, Sang Gyun Kim, Joo Sung Kim, Hyun Chae Jung

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Fluoroscopic Stenting as a Bridge to SurgeryEmergency medicine international · 2020
    Article
  9. Endoscopic stenting in colorectal cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Laparoscopic approach in gastrointestinal emergencies.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    Review
  18. Review
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ji Min ChoiDepartment of Internal Medicine and Liver Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 28 Yongon-dong, Chongno-gu, Seoul, 110-744, Republic of Korea, skyjimin@hanmail.net.
Changhyun Lee
Yoo Min Han
Minjong Lee
Young Hoon Choi
Dong Kee Jang
Jong Pil Im
Sang Gyun Kim
Joo Sung Kim
Hyun Chae Jung
New Generation University College · ETSeoul National University · KRSeoul National University Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelf-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) are now regarded as an effective and safe intervention for malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). However, manipulation of the tumor might lead to the spillage of tumor cells and result in distant metastases. We aimed to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS as a bridge to surgery with those of emergency surgery for MCO.

methodsBetween June 2005 and December 2011, 60 patients who underwent elective curative resection after endoscopic SEMS insertion were included in the "SEMS group". The SEMS group was matched to 180 patients who underwent emergency curative surgery for MCO during the same period ["Emergency surgery (ES) group"]. The clinicopathologic characteristics, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups.

resultsThere were no significant differences in demographics, tumor stage, location, and histology between the SEMS group and the ES group. The median follow-up times were 41.4 months (IQR, 22.2-60.0 months) for the SEMS group and 45.0 months (IQR, 20.9-68.1 months) for the ES group. The proportions of patients who received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were comparable (SEMS group vs. ES group, 68.3 % vs. 77.8 %; P = 0.210). The long-term prognosis did not significantly differ between two groups in either the 5-year RFS rate (79.6 % vs. 70.2 %; P = 0.218) or the 5-year OS rate (97.8 % vs. 94.3 %; P = 0.469).

conclusionsLong-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery were comparable to those of primary curative surgery.

Indexed as

StentsAgedCase-Control StudiesChemotherapy, AdjuvantColonic NeoplasmsElective Surgical ProceduresEmergenciesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntestinal ObstructionMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID24789126
OpenAlexW1972037148

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.